The Michael McCorkle "Mac" Jones Thread

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
If those other teams that scored the same-ish number of points as the Patriots had more games in the 30s than NE, that also means they had more really bad games too.

KC: 48, 42, 41, 36, 35, 34, 33, 31, 31, 28, 24, 22, 20, 20, 19, 13, 3
50s: 0
40s: 3
30s: 6
20s: 5
10s: 2
1s: 1

Top 3 scores: 131 (43.7)
Bottom 3 scores: 35 (11.7)
Top 5 scores: 202 (40.4)
Bottom 5 scores: 75 (15.0)

NE: 54, 50, 45, 36, 29, 27, 25, 25, 25, 24, 24, 21, 17, 17, 17, 16, 14, 13
50s: 2
40s: 1
30s: 1
20s: 6
10s: 4
1s: 0

Top 3 scores: 149 (49.7)
Bottom 3 scores: 43 (14.3)
Top 5 scores: 214 (42.8)
Bottom 5 scores: 77 (15.4)

There's no doubt that KC (which we all agree was better and much more potent, even though they scored similar amounts of points - 480 for KC, 462 for NE) was better and more consistent. But they also put up a real stinker unlike anything NE did (the 3 point game at Ten).

The Patriots scored more points at the top end of the scale (either top 3 or top 5, whichever you prefer) AND at the bottom end of the scale (either top 3 or top 5, whichever you prefer). But KC was much better in the middle.
I mostly agree with that. The Pats had a handful of A+ performances and only one or two real stinkers. They had a lot of C-minus games. Note that this makes the outlier performances even more distorting (since there were not corresponding negative outliers to counterweight them).
 

ponch73

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2006
870
Stumptown via Chelmsford
If those other teams that scored the same-ish number of points as the Patriots had more games in the 30s than NE, that also means they had more really bad games too.

There's no doubt that KC (which we all agree was better and much more potent, even though they scored similar amounts of points - 480 for KC, 462 for NE) was better and more consistent. But they also put up a real stinker unlike anything NE did (the 3 point game at Ten).

The Patriots scored more points at the top end of the scale (either top 3 or top 5, whichever you prefer) AND at the bottom end of the scale (either top 3 or top 5, whichever you prefer). But KC was much better in the middle.
Not exactly sure what your argument here is. Originally, it seemed to question the points per drive stat as a measure of QB play, but median points per drive showed that Burrow performed at a higher level than Mac last year. Same holds true for Mahomes.

Mac had 3 games last year with a points per drive number above 5. Mahomes had 2. But Mac also had 8 games with a points per drive number of 2.0 or below. Mahomes had 5 (including the stinker against Tennessee). Mac's median points per drive in the regular season was 2.2. Mahomes was 3.1.

Is your argument that Mahomes' points per drive performance is more variable on a game by game basis than Mac's? Yes, in terms of absolute magnitude. His standard deviation was 1.54 versus 1.37 for Mac and 1.09 for Burrow. But no on a relative basis. Mahomes' standard deviation was 50% of his median versus 55% for Mac and 42% for Burrow.

So, Mahomes had variable performance, but at a much higher level than Mac. Burrow had steadier performance at a higher level than Mac. Mac was more boom or bust, with a lot more bust.

Another issue with Mac is that his defense aided his numbers last season. 43 of his 420 regular season points were essentially gifted by the defense. 12 times the defense set him up at or inside of his opponent's 40 yard line. And once (in the Jacksonville game) they set him up at the opponent's 1 yard line. Those 13 drives are baked into his overall 2021 regular season points per drive number. Not sure how this compares with Mahomes and Burrow, but I suspect that they did more of the heavy lifting with their offenses' points per drive numbers.

EDIT: Just checked ... Mahomes got the ball on or inside his opponents' 40 9 times in the 2021 regular season.
 
Last edited:

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
It’s not just Mac or Mahomes. It’s Patriots vs Chiefs or Bengals or whatever.

Remember this all goes back to the point that someone else made over how QBs are measured by team performance and I asked whether that was really true.
 

ponch73

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2006
870
Stumptown via Chelmsford
It’s not just Mac or Mahomes. It’s Patriots vs Chiefs or Bengals or whatever.

Remember this all goes back to the point that someone else made over how QBs are measured by team performance and I asked whether that was really true.
In the modern NFL, it's hard for me to imagine a starting QB comfortably holding on to his job when his offense only produces around 2 points per drive over the course of multiple seasons even if coaching, pass protection and receiver separation are contributing factors. It's Baker Mayfield and Sam Darnold redux. The book is not yet written on Mac, but the second chapter is looking ominous so far.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,404
around the way
Yes, obviously on your first sentence.

But on your second sentence, the Patriots and Mac did protect the ball and there were posts complaining about his average target distance. Not saying you, just saying that Mac is apparently going to be a lightning rod because he's the guy after The Guy. And yes, I'm sure whichever poster says he's not anti-Mac because of *that* reason is 100% correct, I meant the other poster.

I wish that I weren't so fucking lazy that I could carve out the time to compare the posts of the "Mac is definitely not the guy" people with the ones who were posting "Mac is definitely the guy" last year. Bet a week's pay that there's a fair amount of overlap.

There were posts here last year about the points that Mac was leaving on the field because everything was a checkdown while guys like Henry were waltzing through secondaries wide open. This year the team took off the training wheels to see if Mac could challenge downfield more, and a lot of bad shit happened. The 10-7 Mac Jones probably goes between 8-9 and 10-7 this year too, but nobody wants checkdown charlie as a franchise QB, so they had to try a bigger offense. And maybe he's not the guy or might grow into the guy. I sure as hell don't know. But talking about how much he "regressed" is missing the forest for the trees IMO.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
If Mac throws it to Jakobi sitting there the defender will pick it off because he is right below him. If Jakobi breaks on the out route the defender would have easily undercut it given Jakobi was above him. Jakobi was not open on that route - the zone defender covered it well.
 

ponch73

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2006
870
Stumptown via Chelmsford
Last edited:

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,840
Patriots continuing to stand behind Mac. Wish I knew what the "good things for the team" that Mac did that "won't show up in the stat sheet" were. Audibling to successful run plays? Not berating his o-linemen after taking big hits?

https://www.espn.com/blog/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4826059/patriots-coaches-players-are-united-behind-starting-qb-mac-jones

https://www.patriots.com/news/patriots-assistant-coaches-praise-mac-jones-for-performance-vs-jets
There's places to find that stuff out but if you are just here for the narrative, then go off my man.
 

SamCassellsStones

New Member
Feb 8, 2017
130
Patriots continuing to stand behind Mac. Wish I knew what the "good things for the team" that Mac did that "won't show up in the stat sheet" were. Audibling to successful run plays? Not berating his o-lineman after taking big hits?

https://www.espn.com/blog/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4826059/patriots-coaches-players-are-united-behind-starting-qb-mac-jones

https://www.patriots.com/news/patriots-assistant-coaches-praise-mac-jones-for-performance-vs-jets
Say what you will, but he does seem resilient - for example the Cowboys game last year (seemingly fatal interception, followed by improbable long-bomb TD), and not completely defecating himself in the 2nd half of the jets game after the would-be pick 6. He’s good at overcoming sucking, which is a good skill for him given that he often sucks.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,096
Patriots continuing to stand behind Mac. Wish I knew what the "good things for the team" that Mac did that "won't show up in the stat sheet" were. Audibling to successful run plays? Not berating his o-linemen after taking big hits?

https://www.espn.com/blog/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4826059/patriots-coaches-players-are-united-behind-starting-qb-mac-jones

https://www.patriots.com/news/patriots-assistant-coaches-praise-mac-jones-for-performance-vs-jets
Sometimes the coaches that see the players every day in practice may actually have a better idea of who the better starting QB would be. Disclosure: I am a Mac fan, but am losing faith in him, and feel that if he doesn't show improvement over the 2nd half of the season the Pats would be well served to look at alternatives for 2023 (one of which may be Zappe).

I also don't expect the coaches to start publicly throwing Mac under the bus. That's not how Belichick operates. Like ever.
 

FL4WL3SS

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
14,913
Andy Brickley's potty mouth
Mac also might be playing because there's a lack of a better option. Maybe BB actually likes Zappe, but it doesn't make much sense to start a rookie and he's better off learning this year while we figure out what we have in Mac.

It's hard to imagine BB is thrilled with all the mistakes, but maybe he's seeing enough in practice the he has faith he'll turn in around.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,238
Patriots continuing to stand behind Mac. Wish I knew what the "good things for the team" that Mac did that "won't show up in the stat sheet" were. Audibling to successful run plays? Not berating his o-linemen after taking big hits?

https://www.espn.com/blog/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4826059/patriots-coaches-players-are-united-behind-starting-qb-mac-jones

https://www.patriots.com/news/patriots-assistant-coaches-praise-mac-jones-for-performance-vs-jets
Of course they are standing behind the starter. The team may end up being mediocre, but if you're waiting for players and coaches to not talk up the starting QB, you'll be waiting a long time.
 

streeter88

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 2, 2006
1,807
Melbourne, Australia
Unfortunately this week seems to have left us all in the same place we were last week which is wondering whether Mac at the helm will be able to generate positive momentum and lead the team effectively or if Zappe was the answer, and whether the team will be good enough collectively to eke out another win next week to get to the bye with a >500 record, before the real games start afterwards. It's deflating really.
 

ponch73

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2006
870
Stumptown via Chelmsford
Of course they are standing behind the starter. The team may end up being mediocre, but if you're waiting for players and coaches to not talk up the starting QB, you'll be waiting a long time.
It's not the standing behind the starter that surprises me, it's that they seem genuinely pleased with his performance in the Jets game. Maybe it's just optics, maybe not. Who knows?
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
It's not the standing behind the starter that surprises me, it's that they seem genuinely pleased with his performance in the Jets game. Maybe it's just optics, maybe not. Who knows?
I think it is a combination of several things. But one thing is probably that his confidence is shot and they want to rebuild it. Another is that the OL really was terrible.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,238
It's not the standing behind the starter that surprises me, it's that they seem genuinely pleased with his performance in the Jets game. Maybe it's just optics, maybe not. Who knows?
I'm sure there's lots of optics involved. The next time the Patriots' coaching staff tells the public what it *really* thinks about something will be one of the first times. All *we* have is "he's starting, so they must think he' gives them a better chance than the other guy."
 

ShaneTrot

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2002
6,401
Overland Park, KS
I feel that Mac has been lousy this season but also has been a victim of circumstances. The offensive line has been shaky in most of his starts. The receivers have not been great except for Meyers when he has been healthy and Parker against the Ravens. All the offensive players have been up and down except for Stevenson and Owenu. He needs more help and this team has only looked good against Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Detroit who have been shit shows for the most part.
 

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,951
Isle of Plum
This is ridiculous -- Zappe with the same coaches and less experience has had a 7.20 ANY/A across 92 attempts and 4 games, with two games against bottom tier defenses (1st is Lions at 8.3, while the Browns are tied at 7th at 7.0). Mac has 4.47 ANY/A with 138 attempts across 5 games, with two mediocre games against two bottom tier pass defenses (Miami's 4th worst by ANY/A at 7.2, Pittsburgh is 7th at 7.0).

At some level, one has to acknowledge that the supporting staff has been fine -- Mac Jones is currently not. I hope he improves, but his play is the primary cause.
Fair enough, I actually agree with almost all that (well, not that my point is ridiculous ; ) and I do acknowledge Zappe outperformed Mac with identical coaching. The idea of sandbagging floated-ish by Bedard beggars belief.

I also think whatever the OC structure they currently have in place is now functioning and will continue to improve, potentially substantially. That said, where I have to qualify is the bolded. They were not fine during what should have been a Mac development offseason, and preseason, and from what I saw, early season. Fine if you saw it differently, we can agree to disagree.

Bill gushed about Macs offseason work so it appears he did what he could to build on last year, and I think at some level one has to acknowledge that installing a new system by new coaches, however talented and however much OC adjacent experience they had, set us on this path.

I believe Bill decided the short term setback would play longer term dividends as he installed his new people and offense. He's earned more than enough rope to see if he's right. I think (hope! as highlighted by my therapist upthread) coaching was the primary cause of Mac's current performance, and that he's getting coaching from people who can now do more than effectively just put one foot in front of the other while they learn their own new jobs.

One things for sure: there are useful weapons and Mac's career is in his own hands. He'll get the season to show why they drafted him where they did, and why he made the pro bowl as a rookie.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,840
Some things I found trolling the internet tonight:


Pats ranks

Passing plays over 20 yards: 3rd (last year 10th)
Passing plays over 40 yards: 8th (last year 19th)
% of pass attempts over 20 yards: 1st (don't have this but I know it ain't better)

That's all good stuff--the Pats are evolving on offense in terms of big plays.


The bad?

Red zone offense TD%: 29th (last year 7th)
TO: 32nd (last year 17th)
TO differential 15th (last year 8th)
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
I know some of you dgas about PFF’s turnover worthy play stat. You can gleefully ignore this.
He had another 2 TWP performance on Sunday. He made some nice plays but he’s still making multiple catastrophic plays per game. Sure he was under pressure but you know so what? A lot of QBs are under pressure. To me I appreciate the good he did but I’m still worried about his penchant for turnovers. Even with the miscommunication Meyers was not open and the defender would likely have cut off the out route with the same result. Part of that is a bad route from Meyers and part of that is a good defensive play and route recognition but another part is Mac has to confirm the coverage before he throws it. Just because there is timing and anticipation with a route doesn’t give you justification to throw it blind or not read the zone defender. I’m not giving up on him or anything but I’m still frustrated with multiple inexcusable throws per game.
 

FL4WL3SS

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
14,913
Andy Brickley's potty mouth
Sunday will be pretty telling. It will be his third game back, so he has had plenty of time to get his feet back under him. If he takes even a small step forward, it'll be encouraging because then I'll be at least somewhat optimistic that they'll come out of the bye with some good momentum and can fix the inconsistencies.

If he plays below average this week and then comes out of the bye week and doesn't play well, then I think we'll pretty much know at that point.

There's a glimmer of hope for now.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,375
I know some of you dgas about PFF’s turnover worthy play stat. You can gleefully ignore this.
He had another 2 TWP performance on Sunday. He made some nice plays but he’s still making multiple catastrophic plays per game. Sure he was under pressure but you know so what? A lot of QBs are under pressure. To me I appreciate the good he did but I’m still worried about his penchant for turnovers. Even with the miscommunication Meyers was not open and the defender would likely have cut off the out route with the same result. Part of that is a bad route from Meyers and part of that is a good defensive play and route recognition but another part is Mac has to confirm the coverage before he throws it. Just because there is timing and anticipation with a route doesn’t give you justification to throw it blind or not read the zone defender. I’m not giving up on him or anything but I’m still frustrated with multiple inexcusable throws per game.
What's a typical number of turnover worthy plays by a starting NFL QB these days? Kirk Cousins has 5 INTs and 2 fumbles lost in 7 games this year. I have no idea how many bad throws he's made that would count as a TWP.
 

ponch73

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2006
870
Stumptown via Chelmsford
Sunday will be pretty telling. It will be his third game back, so he has had plenty of time to get his feet back under him. If he takes even a small step forward, it'll be encouraging because then I'll be at least somewhat optimistic that they'll come out of the bye with some good momentum and can fix the inconsistencies.

If he plays below average this week and then comes out of the bye week and doesn't play well, then I think we'll pretty much know at that point.

There's a glimmer of hope for now.
I wish he could regain his bearings against a weaker defensive opponent, kind of like Zappe vs. the Lions or Browns. The good news is that Indy's offense isn't world-beating, so Mac will hopefully not be in a shoot-out where he has to try to do too much.
 

FL4WL3SS

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
14,913
Andy Brickley's potty mouth
I wish he could regain his bearings against a weaker defensive opponent, kind of like Zappe vs. the Lions or Browns. The good news is that Indy's offense isn't world-beating, so Mac will hopefully not be in a shoot-out where he has to try to do too much.
At some point he needs to prove he can beat a good defense.
 

Justthetippett

New Member
Aug 9, 2015
2,391
I know some of you dgas about PFF’s turnover worthy play stat. You can gleefully ignore this.
He had another 2 TWP performance on Sunday. He made some nice plays but he’s still making multiple catastrophic plays per game. Sure he was under pressure but you know so what? A lot of QBs are under pressure. To me I appreciate the good he did but I’m still worried about his penchant for turnovers. Even with the miscommunication Meyers was not open and the defender would likely have cut off the out route with the same result. Part of that is a bad route from Meyers and part of that is a good defensive play and route recognition but another part is Mac has to confirm the coverage before he throws it. Just because there is timing and anticipation with a route doesn’t give you justification to throw it blind or not read the zone defender. I’m not giving up on him or anything but I’m still frustrated with multiple inexcusable throws per game.
Is this a marked change for him over last year? Any idea what could be causing it (play calls, bad reads, poor mechanics…)?
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,726
Deep inside Muppet Labs
I have a really hard time giving credence to PFF's stats when to the best of my knowledge they haven't revealed their methodology and unless they've changed they use amateurs to scout and label plays.

That's not saying Mac didn't have terrible goofs against the Jets, he most certainly did. But I have to push back a little against assuming PFF's numbers are ironclad.
 

Time to Mo Vaughn

RIP Dernell
SoSH Member
Mar 24, 2008
7,203
I know some of you dgas about PFF’s turnover worthy play stat. You can gleefully ignore this.
He had another 2 TWP performance on Sunday. He made some nice plays but he’s still making multiple catastrophic plays per game. Sure he was under pressure but you know so what? A lot of QBs are under pressure. To me I appreciate the good he did but I’m still worried about his penchant for turnovers. Even with the miscommunication Meyers was not open and the defender would likely have cut off the out route with the same result. Part of that is a bad route from Meyers and part of that is a good defensive play and route recognition but another part is Mac has to confirm the coverage before he throws it. Just because there is timing and anticipation with a route doesn’t give you justification to throw it blind or not read the zone defender. I’m not giving up on him or anything but I’m still frustrated with multiple inexcusable throws per game.
Does the called back pick 6 count as a TWP?
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,751
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
I mean, he threw a pick and he hit a Jets defender in the chest, so not even counting the pick 6 bailed out by the roughing the passer call, there are two easy turnover worthy plays right there.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
Just some background for this year and last and no they aren’t ironclad but I think seeing the big picture might make you feel better about them.
 

Attachments

sodenj5

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
6,619
CT
Just some background for this year and last and no they aren’t ironclad but I think seeing the big picture might make you feel better about them.
Biggest takeaway here is that you’re using low power mode at 100% battery on a charger. Some men just want to watch the world burn.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
8,878
Dallas
I’m hiking and camping in Big Bend National Park. I just got out of the car lol and didn’t want to forget to set it to low power mode for the day while I can’t charge! You got me though. That is however a good reason why I think!
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
His ability to read the field is significantly worse than last year.

He didn’t do anything egregiously dumb today which was an improvement, but 20 completions for only 149 yards isn’t going to cut it against decent teams.
He’s playing much worse than last year that’s unarguable.

He had a much better line last year, especially compared to what he has had over the past 2 games. Also imaginable.

Today Wynn played most of the game, badly, at LG. Why was he in there? Because our #1 pick was even worse. Cajuste at RT was also pretty bad. And Ferentz is a mere shadow of Andrews.

They weren’t just struggling to pass block, they were also letting guys into the backfield untouched on running plays.

A struggling QB is usually not going to respond well to having an OL full of matadors.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,559
Here
His ability to read the field is significantly worse than last year.

He didn’t do anything egregiously dumb today which was an improvement, but 20 completions for only 149 yards isn’t going to cut it against decent teams.
He sure did. That throw to Myers across the field on third down up 16-3 was scream inducing. That's asking for a Pick 6 in a game where your opponent basically can't score on offense.

Overall, the game was in line with his 2022 campaign.
 

Jinhocho

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2001
10,283
Durham, NC
I will add this.

If Mac Jones were an opposing QB we would say he sucked based on his performance this year. If he were a backup forced to start via injury, we would think we need the starter back. Whatever the reason, what ever we saw or thought we saw last year, this guy is a pretty meh qb at this point in his career.
 

ShaneTrot

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2002
6,401
Overland Park, KS
I will add this.

If Mac Jones were an opposing QB we would say he sucked based on his performance this year. If he were a backup forced to start via injury, we would think we need the starter back. Whatever the reason, what ever we saw or thought we saw last year, this guy is a pretty meh qb at this point in his career.
He cannot elevate the team. He needs everything to be perfect or it's a clusterf__k.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
He cannot elevate the team. He needs everything to be perfect or it's a clusterf__k.
Whether “he needs everything to be perfect” is an interesting discussion topic but not one today’s game shed any light on. I mean, today, 3/5 of he offensive line was a disaster. That’s a long way from perfect.
 

FL4WL3SS

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
14,913
Andy Brickley's potty mouth
Whether “he needs everything to be perfect” is an interesting discussion topic but not one today’s game shed any light on. I mean, today, 3/5 of he offensive line was a disaster. That’s a long way from perfect.
So what's your argument here? Are you saying Mac was good today in spite of the OL? Because that's clearly not true. The only TD the offense scored was gifted to them on the 2 yard line by the defense.

He played good enough to support the defense in a win. I feel confident Zappe or no-name backup QB on any other team could have done what Mac did today.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
So what's your argument here? Are you saying Mac was good today in spite of the OL? Because that's clearly not true. The only TD the offense scored was gifted to them on the 2 yard line by the defense.

He played good enough to support the defense in a win. I feel confident Zappe or no-name backup QB on any other team could have done what Mac did today.
Zappe never had to deal with line play as bad as what Mac has had over the past 2 weeks. (Losing Andrews to injury had a notable negative impact on the play of Strange - so it was like a downgrade at 2 positions.)

Mac did not turn the ball over, did not chuck it up for grabs, made some plays. I think that was about all that could reasonably be expected from him. Better protected QBs have multiple turnover games reasonably often, even Zappe in his wins had a bunch of turnovers.
 

Justthetippett

New Member
Aug 9, 2015
2,391
He’s playing much worse than last year that’s unarguable.

He had a much better line last year, especially compared to what he has had over the past 2 games. Also imaginable.

Today Wynn played most of the game, badly, at LG. Why was he in there? Because our #1 pick was even worse. Cajuste at RT was also pretty bad. And Ferentz is a mere shadow of Andrews.

They weren’t just struggling to pass block, they were also letting guys into the backfield untouched on running plays.

A struggling QB is usually not going to respond well to having an OL full of matadors.
The line looked bad but how many confidence-inducing plays did Mac make today? Two? Three? He seems off every play, either with his read, his timing or both. It’s really disappointing.
 

FL4WL3SS

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
14,913
Andy Brickley's potty mouth
Zappe never had to deal with line play as bad as what Mac has had over the past 2 weeks. (Losing Andrews to injury had a notable negative impact on the play of Strange - so it was like a downgrade at 2 positions.)

Mac did not turn the ball over, did not chuck it up for grabs, made some plays. I think that was about all that could reasonably be expected from him. Better protected QBs have multiple turnover games reasonably often, even Zappe in his wins had a bunch of turnovers.
He had one turnover in his two wins and that was more on the receiver than him.
 

Time to Mo Vaughn

RIP Dernell
SoSH Member
Mar 24, 2008
7,203
Mac is showing almost no positives. He's checking down like Mark Sanchez. This isn't all on the OL, he actually is making the OL worse.

I am obviously not BB, but I would bench him and give Zappe first team reps this week.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,751
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Zappe never had to deal with line play as bad as what Mac has had over the past 2 weeks. (Losing Andrews to injury had a notable negative impact on the play of Strange - so it was like a downgrade at 2 positions.)

Mac did not turn the ball over, did not chuck it up for grabs, made some plays. I think that was about all that could reasonably be expected from him. Better protected QBs have multiple turnover games reasonably often, even Zappe in his wins had a bunch of turnovers.
He did chuck one up for grabs, Meyers just did his best to bail him out.

I just don't get why Mac Jones deserves brownie points for not completely imploding in a game in year two. He made no plays.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
He did chuck one up for grabs, Meyers just did his best to bail him out.

I just don't get why Mac Jones deserves brownie points for not completely imploding in a game in year two. He made no plays.
Well, they won the game. The line sucked. Mac is messed up this year. It’s better to win than lose under such circumstances, and a couple of turnovers might have done that.
 

Ralphwiggum

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
9,825
Needham, MA
While it is true that Mac got no help from his line, I think it’s clear he is also lost out there most of the time. He looks skittish in the pocket, has terrible footwork, doesn’t seem to feel the rush, holds the ball too long, and doesn’t seem to go through his progressions to find open receivers. Playing QB in the NFL at a high level is something only a handful of guys can do, Mac just may not be one of them. I’ve been incredibly disappointed in his clear regression this year with no sign of any progress.

All of that said, I’m still fine with them continuing to play him, to see if he can break out of this and show some progress. I know everyone wants to see Zappe and maybe from a fan’s perspective that would be more fun, and maybe Zappe is better than Mac. But I still think figuring out whether to move on from Mac or not is the most important thing right now.

Now if this is all Mac has and he’s handed the starting job next year again without any kind of meaningful competition for the position, then I‘ll start to wonder what’s going on.
 

RG33

Certain Class of Poster
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2005
7,199
CA
He just looks so lacking in confidence in the pocket. I get that the OL has been awful, but even when he does get a bit of time, he seems to get skittish and happy feet, and he has made poor decisions all year.

I’m an eternal optimist with Boston teams, and certainly in the “In Belichick We Trust” camp, but I am very close to jumping on the Zappe Train.