Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Week 1 impressions: Brissett


Imgrandojji

Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

Brissett has a freaking grenade launcher for an arm. It was awesome to see some laser passes out there. Haven't seen that forever! 

 

I was worried about his touch, but those two back shoulder fades to the left were both well placed. 

 

The whole run run run run run play calling in the 4th was stupid though. If they would've mixed in some play action they would've ate that defense up without taking so much time off the clock. Granted that's not on Brissett, but let the guy chuck the ball. 

Would you have wanted our defense back out with as winded as they were.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 487
  • Created
  • Last Reply
6 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I will start off by saying that I thought Brissett played a solid game all the way around and some of my concerns about his ability to make sound decisions while under pressure (physical pressure to situational pressure) are somewhat alleviated.

 

But, The 190 yards in and of itself is not bad, but 190 yards on 21 completions is a bit concerning.  That is only about 9 yards per completion, you really want your QB in the 11-12 yard per completion range.  To use your Cousins example, he had 8 completions for 98 yards for 12.25 yards per completion.  So the 9 yards per completion is an indication of playing it safe and not take any chances.

 

I'm not drawing any conclusions from one game, because one game does not indicate anything.  it's just something I am going to track and see if it becomes a trend.

 

Even with that, the Colts should have won the game and 9 times out of 10 Vinny does not miss all of those kicks and the Colts win.

It's not bad, it's just a different style of quarterbacking, more similar to what the Patriots do with intermediate passes and yards after the catch. 

 

One thing to bear in mind is that we were facing a very stout secondary, and that's going to limit your YACs.  I think those numbers might simply be a factor of us playing a very good defense, and if anything, it's to Brissett's credit that he went 21/27 against a defense that's universallly considered one of the best in the business atm.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Imgrandojji said:

It's not bad, it's just a different style of quarterbacking, more similar to what the Patriots do with intermediate passes and yards after the catch. 

This is not true.  Yards per completion is one of those truly meaningful and telling stats in the NFL.  It's not bad for one game, that is true.  But, over the long haul it is bad.  If you want to use the Patriots as an example, Brady averages 11.8 ypc over his career and had 14. something in the win yesterday.

Just now, Imgrandojji said:

 

One thing to bear in mind is that we were facing a very stout secondary, and that's going to limit your YACs.  I think those numbers might simply be a factor of us playing a very good defense, and if anything, it's to Brissett's credit that he went 21/27 against a defense that's universallly considered one of the best in the business atm.

That is why I said I am not drawing any conclusions from one game and why I stated I thought JB played solid game all the way around. 

 

Two points, Chargers D was good last year but not one of the "best in the business" And no one really knows how they will be this year, early indications are they are not good, but again, you can't draw conclusions after one game.  And two if something is "universally" considered to be true then that is something that needs to be questioned heavily.  One of the worst phrases in human language is "everybody says so".

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, krunk said:

No they werent. Brissett had all kinds of time. Bosa got there once.

I agree, Chargers got two sacks on the day but outside of those two sacks, JB was pressured very little.

 

I also went back and watched the 63 yard TD run by Mack.  And the entire line did an excellent job.  But Big Q got out there and took the LB on the play side completely out of the play, he didn't maul him but he blocked him until Mack was past.  But Glow is the reason it went from a long running play to a TD, he got out and sealed #44 on the backside pursuit.  If he doesn't make that block, #44 gets there and makes the tackle for a 10-12 yard gain.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I agree, Chargers got two sacks on the day but outside of those two sacks, JB was pressured very little.

 

I also went back and watched the 63 yard TD run by Mack.  And the entire line did an excellent job.  But Big Q got out there and took the LB on the play side completely out of the play, he didn't maul him but he blocked him until Mack was past.  But Glow is the reason it went from a long running play to a TD, he got out and sealed #44 on the backside pursuit.  If he doesn't make that block, #44 gets there and makes the tackle for a 10-12 yard gain.

Charger fans are talking very highly of the Colt OL. The way people have talked in the past about the Cowboys.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

I agree, Chargers got two sacks on the day but outside of those two sacks, JB was pressured very little.

 

I also went back and watched the 63 yard TD run by Mack.  And the entire line did an excellent job.  But Big Q got out there and took the LB on the play side completely out of the play, he didn't maul him but he blocked him until Mack was past.  But Glow is the reason it went from a long running play to a TD, he got out and sealed #44 on the backside pursuit.  If he doesn't make that block, #44 gets there and makes the tackle for a 10-12 yard gain.

I noticed pascal was on the long play by Mack also. I think we can see why he wasn’t cut.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chloe6124 said:

I noticed pascal was on the long play by Mack also. I think we can see why he wasn’t cut.

Ok.  But Pascal didn't do anything on that play, he was on the back side and just ran down the field, he didn't really block anyone other than shielding a guy who was not going to catch Mack anyways.

 

I don't think they kept him so he could run with and cheer on the guys making a big play.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

Ok.  But Pascal didn't do anything on that play, he was on the back side and just ran down the field, he didn't really block anyone other than shielding a guy who was not going to catch Mack anyways.

 

I don't think they kept him so he could run with and cheer on the guys making a big play.

I give that to you. Pascal though is a great blocker and does a lot of dirty work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

I noticed pascal was on the long play by Mack also. I think we can see why he wasn’t cut.

so was Hilton the run actually was to Hilton side and he got wiped my a player that fell to the ground. I think they are mixing up the personnel to not show there had as much on running plays maybe setting up some play action for later but i wonder if we will run this much or more going forward if so TY/Campbell should see some one on ones as people stack the box to slow down the rushing attack. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

This is not true.  Yards per completion is one of those truly meaningful and telling stats in the NFL.  It's not bad for one game, that is true.  But, over the long haul it is bad.  If you want to use the Patriots as an example, Brady averages 11.8 ypc over his career and had 14. something in the win yesterday.

That is why I said I am not drawing any conclusions from one game and why I stated I thought JB played solid game all the way around. 

 

Two points, Chargers D was good last year but not one of the "best in the business" And no one really knows how they will be this year, early indications are they are not good, but again, you can't draw conclusions after one game.  And two if something is "universally" considered to be true then that is something that needs to be questioned heavily.  One of the worst phrases in human language is "everybody says so".

 

It is a very telling stat. And 7 y/c is laughably low...and tells us a lot about how incredibly conservative the passing game was. Not going to win many games like that. I believe Mack had just as many 20+ yard runs as JB had completed passes. That 2nd TD pass was all Hilton...and poor defense. 

 

JB was solid...and did exactly what Reich asked him to (so I hope Reich asks for more next week). He did not play like a top 10 QB (like someone said)...but a big part of that was playcalling.

 

I am with you on the Chargers though...that version of the Chargers didn't look as good as I thought. Henry and Ekeler (predictably) gashed the Colts (those are legit long-term issues with this scheme I think)...but that defense wasn't very good. I might be concerned as a Chargers fan...if it still looks this bad next game. They were missing James though...who was arguably as valuable as any defensive player can be last year. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, krunk said:

Charger fans are talking very highly of the Colt OL. The way people have talked in the past about the Cowboys.

 

Mack was getting 5 yards without being touched quite often...reminded me of what NE used to do the Colts (and just about any other team they wanted to).

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Superman said:

The play calling was somewhat conservative ... 

 

Seemed to me so as well. Since I listened to the game on satellite SiriusXM radio, I have different perspective.  It seems that might have been game planned?  try to establish the run, avoid the pass rush with high accuracy, faster hitting passes/routes. Take a chance once in a while with an outside the numbers throw (the back shoulder fades).

 

The team kicked themselves in the shin many times in all phases (even JB with his botched 1st down snap/fumble/recovery).  Getting more aggressive might have not been the positive here it may be later in the season.

 

11 hours ago, Superman said:

and I wonder if JB has the freedom to identify a coverage and get out of a run play to take advantage of it.

 

With the lack of practices and even more reduced 'reps', I'm thinking there's a lot of the playbook still not installed yet.  That would limit audible calls.  I'm thinking Reich/Sirianni/JB might run a 'check with me' system this early in the year.  A main play is called, but also 1 alternative pre-set play alternative.  JB calls the 1st in the huddle, but if he sees a situation where the called play isn't optimal once they line up, he can go to the other play (the check with me part) which might be better in that instance, yet may not be fully as optimal as a full audible play might be.

 

To me, a lot of teams showed the lack of practice (lots of sloppiness) and reps (lots of players looking gassed at the end of games. And some teams have a lot more work than others right now.
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Blindside said:

I see a Head coach trying to figure out who and what he has at QB. Chunk plays are winning plays yet we didnt throw it deep once to force the defense to defend the receivers down field. This game looked to be heading to a blowout in the first half. Marlon Mack single handily kept us in the game and when we needed a miracle Hooker with the interception

of the year.  Though I am not putting all this on the coach.  We have been told JB has  all the checks downs and can use them as needed.  This is who JB is. He is someone who will let the balance of the team carry him forward.  He learned from Brady and I think he took a lot from that relationship. I like everyone else would like to see him open it up but Im not 100 that this is his MO. This is why I believe we are 9-7 team sniffing the playoff but not much more. JB would have to reinvent himself in some ways. I hope he does because he brings everything else to the table. 

Its game one......

 

They will expand the playbook as the year goes by to fit with JB and recievers

 

They played a ball control offense........   

Against an excellent team, 

A 12-4 2018 TEAM  

An away game

 

Take away just ONE of the 5-6 FIXABLE pivitol blunders........

WE would have won

 

I am excited how well this team did.......  I expected a lopsided game

 

We are a good team.......

 

A team that will win the AFC south

 

MUCH to be happy with

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just think the chargers were trying to eliminate the big play and letting the underneath stuff through.  When we did go intermediate to deep on the back shoulder stuff they were probably playing Cover 3.  Because of what they were playing I'm sure it's why we decided to run the ball so much.  I'm not sure Reich was being conservative on purpose.  It was probably dictated by the defensive coverages they were getting.  Just think about it, we didn't really get any explosive plays.  If you go back and check I would bet they were playing a lot of cover 2 and cover 3.  I'm pretty sure of it because they were blitzing a whole lot. I'm sure they saw all those weapons and said "We can't let up the big play"  "Let's make Brissett be QB and finish drives" "If they beat us that way then fine".

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

Seemed to me so as well. Since I listened to the game on satellite SiriusXM radio, I have different perspective.  It seems that might have been game planned?  try to establish the run, avoid the pass rush with high accuracy, faster hitting passes/routes. Take a chance once in a while with an outside the numbers throw (the back shoulder fades).

 

The team kicked themselves in the shin many times in all phases (even JB with his botched 1st down snap/fumble/recovery).  Getting more aggressive might have not been the positive here it may be later in the season.

 

 

With the lack of practices and even more reduced 'reps', I'm thinking there's a lot of the playbook still not installed yet.  That would limit audible calls.  I'm thinking Reich/Sirianni/JB might run a 'check with me' system this early in the year.  A main play is called, but also 1 alternative pre-set play alternative.  JB calls the 1st in the huddle, but if he sees a situation where the called play isn't optimal once they line up, he can go to the other play (the check with me part) which might be better in that instance, yet may not be fully as optimal as a full audible play might be.

 

To me, a lot of teams showed the lack of practice (lots of sloppiness) and reps (lots of players looking gassed at the end of games. And some teams have a lot more work than others right now.
 

 

 

"Sloppy" is probably how I would ultimately classify that game (mostly the defenses and STs). Week 1 is typically like that...as you said. My only real concerns (other than AV) is the ability to take away TEs and pass-catching RBs. They spent a lot of draft capital to that end...and LAC most got what they wanted in the pass game.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

It seems that might have been game planned?  try to establish the run, avoid the pass rush with high accuracy, faster hitting passes/routes. Take a chance once in a while with an outside the numbers throw (the back shoulder fades).

 

Definitely. It was just about a 50/50 mix of called runs/passes. But I'm not just talking about a conservative gameplan. 

 

Quote

Getting more aggressive might have not been the positive here it may be later in the season.

...

I'm thinking Reich/Sirianni/JB might run a 'check with me' system this early in the year.

 

I'm sure the offense will continue to evolve, and general sloppiness was a factor as well (although it wasn't completely sloppy, just a couple big mistakes, I thought). 

 

19 minutes ago, krunk said:

It was probably dictated by the defensive coverages they were getting.  Just think about it, we didn't really get any explosive plays.  If you go back and check I would bet they were playing a lot of cover 2 and cover 3.  I'm pretty sure of it because they were blitzing a whole lot.

 

My comments have been specific to situations where there looked to be single coverage outside, one deep safety played to one side of the formation, stacked box... these are situations where a fully weaponized offense will look to take advantage of the coverage, or at least test it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

 

I yelled "TAILS NEVER FAILS" when Geathers picked heads on the OT coin toss. I was trying to help the D out lol 

I think we would of scored if we had won the toss. They couldn’t stop us either.

 

As bad as the defense looked they looked just as bad letting Mack run all over them.

Some of those throws Brissett made were very elite. Not many QB can make them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

They were terrific...which makes the gameplan a bit frustrating. Hopefully JB gets to let it rip next game.

Again, my take is that they were conservative in the first half but in the second half the run was working so well they just stuck with it.  Had the Chargers stopped it then I think you would have seen a play action deep pass.  Like Tom Moore used to say if you find something that works you keep calling it until the other team stops it.  

 

For what its worth I heard Jacoby post game presser and heard him talking about the late TD to Hilton and how he had Ebron in the end zone and he really wanted to throw it to him but he tried to remember his coaching and threw it to TY.  So maybe it is the plan to take the short stuff and let your play makers make plays for you.  

 

Still as the year goes along I think you will see deep passes.  Even if the plan is to take the short stuff I still think some of the lack of deep passes especially in the second half was because of how well Mack was running the ball and while I will happily be wrong on this I don’t think he will be that effective every week and that will force them to throw more and probably deeper.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Superman said:

 

They stopped him fine in the first half. And there were opportunities to take shots early on. Ebron seemed frustrated by the game flow. 

 

I'm just saying I think they need to push the ball downfield more actively. The offense needs to threaten big plays to stay on schedule. And I think Luck was hardwired to take shots downfield, so I don't know if the passing game would have been as reserved if he was in there.

 

Still, Brissett played a solid game. Not complaining about him. 

 

Reich was conservative, but JB had a chance or 2 downfield.  I heard Sorgi say JB would be upset with himself on one or two plays because while he hit his receiver, he missed (T.Y.) wide open further down field.   Now, was that was because TY was not first in the progression, but JB didn't want to go through them all because Bosa and Ingram possibly lined up over Glowinski and Smith (which was an issue earlier in the game)?  I'll have to watch gamepass.

 

11 hours ago, Restored said:

 

I agree. I think the coaching staff wanted to protect the QB and limit exposure given Bosa’s and Ingram’s abilities.

 

True, yet there were chances but JB went conservative, too.  Later in the season he might let it loose.

 

11 hours ago, Restored said:

They clearly had an emphasis on running the ball and wanted to keep the possessions for Rivers and co. to a minimum, especially in the second half when the running game started to actually get going.

 

I’m willing to bet we see the offense open up more in the coming weeks.

 

"That was part of the plan," Reich said. "We talked about this as an offense. This team, we wanted to come out and dink-and-dunk a little bit early, short control pass game. A lot of the analytics said that this team in the first quarter was pretty good against the rush, especially in the first drive or two. They knew we wanted to run the football. They were crowding the box, so we just said, 'Hey, we're gonna be patient with the run game,' even when we got behind, and I think that helped us out to get us back in."

 

11 hours ago, Scott Pennock said:

Coaching 101 If it works don't change it.

 

Yup-

 

"We just felt good about our run game plan going in," head coach Frank Reich said. "I give the offensive coaching staff a lot of credit. They did a good job game-planning the run, and the guys up front just executed. I remember one time in the game talking to Q (Quenton Nelson) — I usually always get a parameter on Q — I can't remember if it was in the second quarter or the beginning of the third quarter, I said, 'How's it going up there?' And he said, 'Yeah, just keep callin' 'em. Just keep callin' 'em,' so that's what we like to do."

 

I think Mack over 100 yards rushing in the 3rd quarter alone!  174 total.

 

10 hours ago, bluebombers87 said:

As I said, I understand the rules. I just don’t like them.

 

The plane means everything. The player, in theory can never set foot in the end zone, so long as he hits the pylon, it’s a score. He can then lose the ball and it doesn’t matter. This indicates there is an invisible wall that goes in the front two corners of the end zone. So, once a player catches the ball inside said magic zone and hits the ground in bounds, it should be a score. Bobbling the ball is moot at that point as he has broken the plane with a cleanly possessed catch. I understand for it to be a catch but in the field of play if you are touched mid air and then land down, you are down by contact. The ground cannot cause a fumble.

 

They really didn't change the rule all that much.  Just tried to make the fan 'that was a catch' more prevalent. I'll bold what they altered-

 

Catch-

a. secures control of the ball in his hands or arms prior to the ball touching the ground; and

b. touches the ground inbounds with both feet or with any part of his body other than his hands; and

c. after (a) and (b) have been fulfilled, performs any act common to the game (e.g., tuck the ball away, extend it forward (Dez rule), take an additional step, turn upfield, or avoid or ward off an opponent), or he maintains control of the ball long enough to do so. 

Notes:

Movement of the ball does not automatically result in loss of control. (Then Ebron should have been granted the TD?)

 

If a player, who satisfied (a) and (b), but has not satisfied (c), contacts the ground and loses control of the ball, it is an incomplete pass if the ball hits the ground before he regains control,

 

or if he regains control out of bounds (if he lost control, then Ebron doesn't get the TD?)  Still some ambiguity here, IMO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, GoColts8818 said:

Again, my take is that they were conservative in the first half but in the second half the run was working so well they just stuck with it.  Had the Chargers stopped it then I think you would have seen a play action deep pass.  Like Tom Moore used to say if you find something that works you keep calling it until the other team stops it.  

 

For what its worth I heard Jacoby post game presser and heard him talking about the late TD to Hilton and how he had Ebron in the end zone and he really wanted to throw it to him but he tried to remember his coaching and threw it to TY.  So maybe it is the plan to take the short stuff and let your play makers make plays for you.  

 

Still as the year goes along I think you will see deep passes.  Even if the plan is to take the short stuff I still think some of the lack of deep passes especially in the second half was because of how well Mack was running the ball and while I will happily be wrong on this I don’t think he will be that effective every week and that will force them to throw more and probably deeper.

 

Sounds like he has definitely been coached to look short (which is likely the first read). Reich, at some point, will have to trust him to make that call. 

 

The run game was working...but a 23 run/13 pass split is pretty incredible...which is what they had in the 2nd half. Like you said, I can't imagine they will be that effective every week...as they will get pretty predictable (especially since they don't throw to Mack).

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

Reich was conservative, but JB had a chance or 2 downfield.  I heard Sorgi say JB would be upset with himself on one or two plays because while he hit his receiver, he missed (T.Y.) wide open further down field.   Now, was that was because TY was not first in the progression, but JB didn't want to go through them all because Bosa and Ingram possibly lined up over Glowinski and Smith (which was an issue earlier in the game)?  I'll have to watch gamepass.

 

 

Yup. Conservative gameplan + conservative approach by the QB = no shots downfield. Like I said before, it's more of an observation than a complaint. The offense didn't really need to go downfield yesterday, although it probably would have helped when the Chargers were stacking the box. But if JB plays that kind of conservative game moving forward, we're going to see his efficiency stagnate dramatically. @Coffeedrinker brought up his yards/completion, which won't get it done over the course of the season. 

 

And more broader strokes, while I'm not expecting JB to be Peyton Manning at the line, I do want to see him identify a stacked box and single coverage on the outside, and try to take advantage of it. Eventually.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

I think as we open things up for JB he will show he is the next franchise QB. Some of those throws were elite.

I don't think "elite" can be used for Brissetts play yet.   

I would use "competent".   I was satisfied in his play and think he will do well all season.   Probably lead the team to 8-9 victories.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Myles said:

I don't think "elite" can be used for Brissetts play yet.   

I would use "competent".   I was satisfied in his play and think he will do well all season.   Probably lead the team to 8-9 victories.   

I was talking about a couple throws he made. Some of those throws to DF, Cain, and even the one to Ebron were throws not many QB can make.  If we only win 8 games he won’t be the reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Yup. Conservative gameplan + conservative approach by the QB = no shots downfield. Like I said before, it's more of an observation than a complaint. The offense didn't really need to go downfield yesterday, although it probably would have helped when the Chargers were stacking the box. But if JB plays that kind of conservative game moving forward, we're going to see his efficiency stagnate dramatically. @Coffeedrinker brought up his yards/completion, which won't get it done over the course of the season. 

 

And more broader strokes, while I'm not expecting JB to be Peyton Manning at the line, I do want to see him identify a stacked box and single coverage on the outside, and try to take advantage of it. Eventually.

 

Something that's bugging me and I don't really want to draw attention to, but it's really eating at me is Brissett's stats with Pagano/Chudzinski's Air Coryell inspired system. This is a system that begs for big time plays. Sure it also begs for sacks too, but in principle it should bump up your averages per completion/attempt. And Brissett's were(out of 37 QBs):

 

- 32nd in Y/A+

- 35th in nY/A+

- 36th in TD%+

- 33rd in rating+

- 37th in sack%+

- 32nd in adjusted NY/A+

 

In essence we got all the negatives of the system with none of the benefits. Now, the reason I didn't want to draw attention to those is because I realize this was a QB thrown into the deep end of the pool without much preparation in the system and because I hated with passion that coaching and playcalling staff and I'm perfectly content dropping the huge majority of the blame on them.... but... what if it really is something about Brissett;s decisionmaking and vision that makes implementing more adventurous game plan and  playcalling close to impossible? None of those numbers are good. He has some exceptional flashes from that 2017 season. As Greg Cosell says he has some throws that if they were made by Mahomes people would still be talking about them. But they are so few and far between. 

 

I can't wait to see what happens in the next 3-4 months. The development of this storyline is going to be fascinating. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Coffeedrinker said:

This is not true.  Yards per completion is one of those truly meaningful and telling stats in the NFL.  It's not bad for one game, that is true.  But, over the long haul it is bad.  If you want to use the Patriots as an example, Brady averages 11.8 ypc over his career and had 14. something in the win yesterday.

That is why I said I am not drawing any conclusions from one game and why I stated I thought JB played solid game all the way around. 

 

Two points, Chargers D was good last year but not one of the "best in the business" And no one really knows how they will be this year, early indications are they are not good, but again, you can't draw conclusions after one game.  And two if something is "universally" considered to be true then that is something that needs to be questioned heavily.  One of the worst phrases in human language is "everybody says so".

I agree we need to stretch the field  more. Will mack the mack runs easier

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ClaytonColt said:

That's pretty much my thinking.

 

I liked Brissetts efficiency and poise but in the cold light of day we had more things go our way that I originally thought watching the game.

 

- We won time of possession 

- We won the turnover battle

- We had more sacks

- We had fewer penalties and penalty yards 

- 200+ yard running day

 

I know Vinatieri had a shocker but when you add all those things together slightly more adventurous quarterback plays (and probably play calling) should have put us in a better position to win.

 

Long term, we're going to have days when we don't have a lot of those advantages and need something more from the passing game to get the job done.

 

We also had penalties that gave extra set of downs, or ability to change a Bolts FG to a TD. 

 

"we gave them second chances, and that’s what was hard — you can’t give a good team second chances, in all three phases. And every time they made us pay.”

 

And defense, on a 3rd and 13 from the Colts 28. They convert with a TD pass to Allen. Not to mention all of those gaping holes they ran through at a 6 yds per carry clip.{sigh}

 

Brissett brought us back to tie in a late game scoring drive, with a successful 2 point conversion.

 

Now that this is on tape, teams have to prepare for the run game.  Thus, the opportunities for downfield shots will get wider each passing week Reich/Sirianni can keep a good run game successful.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Chloe6124 said:

I was talking about a couple throws he made. Some of those throws to DF, Cain, and even the one to Ebron were throws not many QB can make.  If we only win 8 games he won’t be the reason.

 

The Ebron throw was a great throw but its a seem pass that EVERY QB in the league can make to some extent.

 

Briesett was competent.  I have concerns about his ability to read.  I don't recall seeing much as far as progressions or any hot reads.  Another thing that concerns me and is what I think seperates the wheat fromt he chaff is the deep out.  It is an important pass because it is very difficult to cover schematically. 

 

The ability to complete the deep out simultaneosly opens up the deep passing game AND the short game.  He didn't throw any of these passes.  Scheme had a lot to do with that, but if we don't show it or if Jacoby can't do it, it will be rough soon.  

 

We have been spoiled with Luck and Manning on the deep out.  Brady rarely has to throw it in their scheme but can still make the throw.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Nickster said:

 

The Ebron throw was a great throw but its a seem pass that EVERY QB in the league can make to some extent.

 

Briesett was competent.  I have concerns about his ability to read.  I don't recall seeing much as far as progressions or any hot reads.  Another thing that concerns me and is what I think seperates the wheat fromt he chaff is the deep out.  It is an important pass because it is very difficult to cover schematically. 

 

The ability to complete the deep out simultaneosly opens up the deep passing game AND the short game.  He didn't throw any of these passes.  Scheme had a lot to do with that, but if we don't show it or if Jacoby can't do it, it will be rough soon.  

 

We have been spoiled with Luck and Manning on the deep out.  Brady rarely has to throw it in their scheme but can still make the throw.

With his arm, and accuracy - it's a good bet JB can throw the deep out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Stephen said:

I agree we need to stretch the field  more. Will mack the mack runs easier

Not stretch the field so much as better on the intermediate throws 12-15 yards.  Usually a 9ypc average indicates a lot of dump offs within 3 yards of the LOS.  The reason I'm not real concerned about it is because: A) it was one game against a team with a good pass rush and 2) JB made some nice intermediate throws.  It was just a stat that is important that shows the effectiveness of a QB and he was a bit below average in this game.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, stitches said:

 

Something that's bugging me and I don't really want to draw attention to, but it's really eating at me is Brissett's stats with Pagano/Chudzinski's Air Coryell inspired system. This is a system that begs for big time plays. Sure it also begs for sacks too, but in principle it should bump up your averages per completion/attempt. And Brissett's were(out of 37 QBs):

 

- 32nd in Y/A+

- 35th in nY/A+

- 36th in TD%+

- 33rd in rating+

- 37th in sack%+

- 32nd in adjusted NY/A+

 

In essence we got all the negatives of the system with none of the benefits. Now, the reason I didn't want to draw attention to those is because I realize this was a QB thrown into the deep end of the pool without much preparation in the system and because I hated with passion that coaching and playcalling staff and I'm perfectly content dropping the huge majority of the blame on them.... but... what if it really is something about Brissett;s decisionmaking and vision that makes implementing more adventurous game plan and  playcalling close to impossible? None of those numbers are good. He has some exceptional flashes from that 2017 season. As Greg Cosell says he has some throws that if they were made by Mahomes people would still be talking about them. But they are so few and far between. 

 

I can't wait to see what happens in the next 3-4 months. The development of this storyline is going to be fascinating. 

 

 

Because of the bolded, I don't know how much value there is in considering 2017 too closely. It's hard to imagine a worse set of circumstances for a second year QB, and that's without pointing out how bad that offensive staff was. The offensive output was the product of a bad system with subpar coaching + a young QB with no knowledge of the system or his teammates + a bad OL + a shortage of receiving options.

 

I think Brissett's physical abilities and shortcomings can be scouted to a degree, based on 2017 -- arm strength, accuracy, footwork (to a degree), escapability, etc. But his ability to run an offense? Besides the intangibles -- his leadership, his work as a teammate, his ability to keep getting up -- not a lot to focus on. His efficiency? Not at all.

 

Luck looked like a different QB in Reich's system. I think Brissett will be different also, and yesterday is a strong indication in that direction. Before the season, my questions were about his ability to make good decisions quickly, which he did yesterday (still need to see some adjustments presnap), and his ability to be a playmaker, which wasn't really on display in the opener. But his basic efficiency numbers are going to be dramatically better right off the bat. It's the more advanced numbers -- net yards, sack %, TD %, etc. -- that I'll be looking out for.

 

And of course, realistic expectations will help. Some people don't seem to understand that JB can play winning football without being a standout QB. There's this effort to pump him up as Luck's equal here, and I don't understand it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...