Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Eason making an impression in camp


CR91

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Excellent height and weight. Rocket arm. #1 prospect coming out of high school. Fromm becomes the starter over Eason. Transfers to different program.  I know everyone has heard the rumours abput his work ethic snd I think the Colts have played that down a little.  I do beleive it is most likely attitude or work ethic or both as to why he had an average college career. He has all the tools and is a steal in the 4th if he can put it all together. I think he is a 2 year project. I do think the Colts will jettison him quickly if he is lazy.

Yup, that's about the size of it.  Starts for GA his freshman year and looks good.  Following year he gets hurt, Jake Fromm takes over, and GA goes to the championship game.  They're not about to demote Fromm after that, so Eason does the logical thing and transfers somewhere else.  Sits out a year by rule.  Earns the starting job and plays as well as he can with limited talent at WR.  Huskies go 8-6.  Meh.

 

Great skills + interrupted development + lack of big accomplishments = 4th round pick.

 

I also agree with you regarding having a rookie take a long time with a veteran mentor.  Heck with that.  Give the kid the ball, and see if he can play.

 

Next year, he'll be the only QB on the roster with a contract.  That's a foot in the door, kid.  Use it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 113
  • Created
  • Last Reply
40 minutes ago, John Hammonds said:

Yup, that's about the size of it.  Starts for GA his freshman year and looks good.  Following year he gets hurt, Jake Fromm takes over, and GA goes to the championship game.  They're not about to demote Fromm after that, so Eason does the logical thing and transfers somewhere else.  Sits out a year by rule.  Earns the starting job and plays as well as he can with limited talent at WR.  Huskies go 8-6.  Meh.

 

Great skills + interrupted development + lack of big accomplishments = 4th round pick.

 

I also agree with you regarding having a rookie take a long time with a veteran mentor.  Heck with that.  Give the kid the ball, and see if he can play.

 

Next year, he'll be the only QB on the roster with a contract.  That's a foot in the door, kid.  Use it.

Agreed, let him start either next season, or sign Rivers one more year if he plays well enough to warrant it. Heck, Rivers sat for two years as a First Round pick behind Brees....Rodgers sat for 3 years as a First Round Pick.....I think sitting a year or two is not a bad thing at all.

 

The plus side to him being the understudy is that the young offensive weapons like Campbell, Pittman, Patmon, Taylor, etc., etc will be pretty polished players ready to break out at that point.

 

The young defense should be hitting on all cylinders by then and that will help with 'Rookie' mistakes.

 

And Ballard will have had another full off-season or two to continue to build the best roster he can surrounding him.

 

A first round pick can be used as Castonzo's replacement so hopefully there is a clean battle handoff made. Pinter will likely take Glow's spot and potentially be better than him. More offensive weapons could be drafted, like a stud tight end as a 2nd or 3rd round pick perhaps?

 

The better the roster is at the point they drop Eason in, the less pressure will be on him to perform. I firmly believe he is our future at QB!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Chloe6124 said:

From the two scrimmages he is for sure looking better then Kelly. If they keep Kelly and try to put Eason on the PS that would be so wrong. Something is starting to rub me the wrong way with Jacoby. Not sure what it is. You can tell players seem much more confident with Rivers.

Nothing rubs me the wrong way, but that's probably because I've never put him up on a pedestal like some folks have. I do think he's a good team mate, and gave it his all (which is all I really care about on a personal level), but he's not outwardly the most likable guy (some of his media reports for example). I don't care about being likable, I just want performance lol. 

 

As far as the players around him, they're going to be most confident with the best performer, and Rivers is clearly better than JB. I've seen numerous (not duplicate) reports talking about how quickly Rivers is getting the ball out, how accurate he is, and how his reads and progressions are spot on. Not perfect by any means, but clearly superior. At the same time, the reports are still calling out JB taking much longer in progressions, and inconsistent in placement. 

 

At the end of the day, a lot of player's livelihoods are tied to performance. And many are tied directly and indirectly to the QBs performance. If you're a WR, TE, or catching RB, you're value gets a big boost with a good QB.  And if you're a rook trying to develop, you want to develop with a good QB. I felt really sorry for the pass catchers last year, especially the young ones. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Chloe6124 said:

From the two scrimmages he is for sure looking better then Kelly. If they keep Kelly and try to put Eason on the PS that would be so wrong. Something is starting to rub me the wrong way with Jacoby. Not sure what it is. You can tell players seem much more confident with Rivers.

Jacoby has already accepted the backup role again unless I am missing something? Why would he rub you the wrong the way? Just asking? He has been a better teammate than I thought accepting that role after being a starter. He knows Rivers is better so he is smart. We have no clue how good Eason will be, he is a rookie. JB should be the #2 for 2020 no matter how much you or anyone dislike him. Unless you think Eason is Andrew Luck lmao . Most rookies aren't Andrew who can go 11-5 with a 90% of a  crap roster like we had in 2012. Outside of Wayne, Mathis, TY, and Vinny - Andrew carried us. Burrow at best will be 8-8 with Cincy IMO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

I am not a big believer in the mentoring of a younger  by an older elite qb in his twilight  years. The great ones are so invested in their own  careers. They take all the snaps and are busy and focused  studying film til late at night. Sure young qb can watch say Philips work ethic. It is the job of the qb coach and most likely Reich to an extent  to teach and groom Eason. Philips contribution is probably going to b minor. Painter and Sorgi  had one of the greatest and look at their development. I cant think of a young qb who developed under an older elite qb. Can u?

 

Aaron Rodgers. . . but he was a 1st round pick.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

Aaron Rodgers. . . but he was a 1st round pick.  

 

He didn't develop. Favre notoriously was not good to him. Rodgers was arguably exactly what he'd have been if he'd started from the gitgo.

Mahomes.....now there's a good argument he developed because he sat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Colt.45 said:

 

He didn't develop. Favre notoriously was not good to him. Rodgers was arguably exactly what he'd have been if he'd started from the gitgo.

Mahomes.....now there's a good argument he developed because he sat.

McCarthy  worked with  Rodgers  and helped improve  his mechanics 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Moosejawcolt You can put Brady in that category. Rodgers, even though Farve wasn't great to him a QB can still learn a ton from a vet including how to carry themselves when all other players have all eyes on them. I think a big mistake is whenever a team brings in a vet for no other reason then to mentor a rookie QB, pretty much every team Fitzpatrick has been a part of. Rivers though wasnt brought in for that aspect, he was brought in with the mindset to win games so Eason can see what a great QB does to prepare, to lead/speak to teammates and how to interact with coaches. I still think if Luck could have sat behind Manning just 1 year there is a good chance he would still be playing.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, twfish said:

@Moosejawcolt You can put Brady in that category. Rodgers, even though Farve wasn't great to him a QB can still learn a ton from a vet including how to carry themselves when all other players have all eyes on them. I think a big mistake is whenever a team brings in a vet for no other reason then to mentor a rookie QB, pretty much every team Fitzpatrick has been a part of. Rivers though wasnt brought in for that aspect, he was brought in with the mindset to win games so Eason can see what a great QB does to prepare, to lead/speak to teammates and how to interact with coaches. I still think if Luck could have sat behind Manning just 1 year there is a good chance he would still be playing.  

 

Thing is with Fitzpatrick is I don't think that is why he's really brought in.  I think that's the reason they say they are bringing him in.  But in reality I think it's usually because the team doesn't have any real confidence in their starter.

 

That's why Ryan Fitzpatrick might not start week 1 but he is almost always starting and usually by week 4.  

 

I agree somewhat on Luck.  McAfee himself has said that he thinks that Luck could have used to learn from Manning that it's ok to be demanding.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

Thing is with Fitzpatrick is I don't think that is why he's really brought in.  I think that's the reason they say they are bringing him in.  But in reality I think it's usually because the team doesn't have any real confidence in their starter.

 

That's why Ryan Fitzpatrick might not start week 1 but he is almost always starting and usually by week 4.  

 

I agree somewhat on Luck.  McAfee himself has said that he thinks that Luck could have used to learn from Manning that it's ok to be demanding.  

If Luck would have demanded the same accountability as Manning from both the FO and the players i think we would have seen some players actually hit their potential such as Moncrief or even Fleener, I think we would have seen the offensive line play better and I also think Luck would have demanded A.Q stay at center instead of Grigson's own personal favorite Harrison screwing up snaps constantly. I don't think he ever realized he had all the say in the world. I really think we could have at least gone to a superbowl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

Thing is with Fitzpatrick is I don't think that is why he's really brought in.  I think that's the reason they say they are bringing him in.  But in reality I think it's usually because the team doesn't have any real confidence in their starter.

 

That's why Ryan Fitzpatrick might not start week 1 but he is almost always starting and usually by week 4.  

 

I agree somewhat on Luck.  McAfee himself has said that he thinks that Luck could have used to learn from Manning that it's ok to be demanding.  

 

 

McAfee is talking stupidly. He's not taking into account ....

1) The Colts did not even know if Manning could come back from that injury.

 

2) Money... Manning was due a 28 million $ signing bonus if he were not cut that March. They would have had to pony up another 22 million $ signing bonus to Luck... which they did.

 

3) McAfee must have forgot just how TERRIBLE that Colt roster was. It was devoid of talent and hand chance to compete for a SB. Yeah .. they did mange to sneak up on teams and pull some wins out of their butt , but no way they could get tom SB.Actually would have done Manning a disservice if they kept him. But #3 goes along with #2 , they could never invest that much money in the QB position with so many other needs.


4) You could never have a talent like Luck sit the bench for 3 years while Manning finished out his career, That's unheard of for a generational talent who was the first pick in the draft.

 

Bottom line is the Colts had a roster that called for a rebuild. They had the ideal situation to be able to start it with Luck. If they wanted to stay with Manning , it would have only made sense to trade pick 1.1 for a huge bounty . Made no sense to invest 50 mill in the QB spot and have Luck sit for 3 years. Surprised that McAfee said something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, dw49 said:

 

 

McAfee is talking stupidly. He's not taking into account ....

1) The Colts did not even know if Manning could come back from that injury.

 

2) Money... Manning was due a 28 million $ signing bonus if he were not cut that March. They would have had to pony up another 22 million $ signing bonus to Luck... which they did.

 

3) McAfee must have forgot just how TERRIBLE that Colt roster was. It was devoid of talent and hand chance to compete for a SB. Yeah .. they did mange to sneak up on teams and pull some wins out of their butt , but no way they could get tom SB.Actually would have done Manning a disservice if they kept him. But #3 goes along with #2 , they could never invest that much money in the QB position with so many other needs.


4) You could never have a talent like Luck sit the bench for 3 years while Manning finished out his career, That's unheard of for a generational talent who was the first pick in the draft.

 

Bottom line is the Colts had a roster that called for a rebuild. They had the ideal situation to be able to start it with Luck. If they wanted to stay with Manning , it would have only made sense to trade pick 1.1 for a huge bounty . Made no sense to invest 50 mill in the QB spot and have Luck sit for 3 years. Surprised that McAfee said something like that.

I agree with this 100%, great post. We had to rebuild and it was time to move on. With the players we had in 2012 that would not have been enough for Manning to win a SB moving forward. Denver simply had more talent and a much better defense. Luck was young, could take hits, and no way was he sitting for 2 or 3 years behind anyone. Manning was due 28 mill, without his salary on the books we could a lot of things. Also it is not like we let Manning go for some scrub, people can say what they want about Luck but he was very good/great at times. Too bad Ballard wasn't the GM back then, Luck probably would've won a SB by now and still playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I agree with this 100%, great post. We had to rebuild and it was time to move on. With the players we had in 2012 that would not have been enough for Manning to win a SB moving forward. Denver simply had more talent and a much better defense. Luck was young, could take hits, and no way was he sitting for 2 or 3 years behind anyone. Manning was due 28 mill, without his salary on the books we could a lot of things. Also it is not like we let Manning go for some scrub, people can say what they want about Luck but he was very good/great at times. Too bad Ballard wasn't the GM back then, Luck probably would've won a SB by now and still playing.

 

 

Crazy but Colts just couldn't fix the O line for so many years . Started when Glenn retired and Polian let the 2 guards go. Polian Jr and Grigson just kept swinging and missing and swinging and missing.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

Aaron Rodgers. . . but he was a 1st round pick.  

And if i recall, Favre didnt mentor him. They did not have a good relationship.  Think  about it for a sec. Your boss comes up to u and says mentor Mark because there is a chance he is replacing u in a year or  two. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/30/2020 at 12:49 PM, Moosejawcolt said:

I am not a big believer in the mentoring of a younger  by an older elite qb in his twilight  years. The great ones are so invested in their own  careers. They take all the snaps and are busy and focused  studying film til late at night. Sure young qb can watch say Philips work ethic. It is the job of the qb coach and most likely Reich to an extent  to teach and groom Eason. Philips contribution is probably going to b minor. Painter and Sorgi  had one of the greatest and look at their development. I cant think of a young qb who developed under an older elite qb. Can u?

Did you happen to watch Eason’s media interview a couple weeks ago on the Colts website?  It’s well worth watching.  
 

He said he was learning a lot just by watching Rivers and Jacoby take snaps. Not just work ethic but things like the way they call plays in the huddle, the protections they call and how they go through their progressions. He said he is also learning in the QB room by listening to their ideas for the coaches. 
 

Even Sirianni admitted that Rivers is better at calling protections than he is. And there is nothing Rivers hasn’t seen from a defense. Eason will most definitely learn from Rivers. Whether that training is superior to being thrown right in as a rookie like Joe Burrow, I cannot say. 
 

Rivers himself sat behind Brees for two years. Rivers then immediately led the team to a 14-2 record after Brees finished 9-7 the year before. So it worked for him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bolts2Colts said:

Did you happen to watch Eason’s media interview a couple weeks ago on the Colts website?  It’s well worth watching.  
 

He said he was learning a lot just by watching Rivers and Jacoby take snaps. Not just work ethic but things like the way they call plays in the huddle, the protections they call and how they go through their progressions. He said he is also learning in the QB room by listening to their ideas for the coaches. 
 

Even Sirianni admitted that Rivers is better at calling protections than he is. And there is nothing Rivers hasn’t seen from a defense. Eason will most definitely learn from Rivers. Whether that training is superior to being thrown right in as a rookie like Joe Burrow, I cannot say. 
 

Rivers himself sat behind Brees for two years. Rivers then immediately led the team to a 14-2 record after Brees finished 9-7 the year before. So it worked for him. 

Thats my point. He watches them take snaps.  I just beleive a lot of the mentoring is done by the qb coach.  I juat dont beleive Rivers has the time to put him undet his wings and guide him. So u r assuming that Brees mentored Rivers? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Thats my point. He watches them take snaps.  I just beleive a lot of the mentoring is done by the qb coach.  I juat dont beleive Rivers has the time to put him undet his wings and guide him. So u r assuming that Brees mentored Rivers? 

Some people learn well by watching and taking advice from others, some do better by playing, making errors and quickly learning from those things. Your OC and QB coaches should be able to mentor anyone for specific tasks but everyone learns skills differently. 
 

In Eason’s case, he needs reps for one since he didn’t get to start his college years all the way through. I’d almost say that everyone, including Manning, Luck, Farve, Montana, Brady etc... would do better long term by sitting and watching how games are managed and circumstances evolve during games. The elites may all get to where they are in the end for sure but the speed with how they get there may be accelerated imho by being able to watch how the other guy either makes mistakes or makes plays out of things that were scripted to do so. He builds his confidence up from the bench in the form of perfecting his classroom time, his one to one coaching lesson time and his on the field practice time. He then can apply that into real on the field game time situations to confirm he has what it takes.
 

How many QB’s did we see get thrown right in, get beat up and/or make bad plays trying to be the hero guy? those guys flamed out far more than succeeded. Could some of those can’t miss types have had more success had they not been thrown to the wolves? We won’t ever know but my gut says they would have. Except Jamarcus Russell, that guy was horrible lol. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, in Manning and Luck’s case, they started from Day 1. Favre, Brady, Montana, Rogers....no. So it clearly depends upon the team’s situation. Some teams have nothing else; some already have an established starter (like the Colts today) and have picked the new QB with the goal of development and hopefully starting in the future. Every situation is different. 
That said, Eason will unquestionably benefit from sitting and learning. He’s going to get his shot in 1-2 years. Until then, he’s The Apprentice. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Hoose said:

Well, in Manning and Luck’s case, they started from Day 1. Favre, Brady, Montana, Rogers....no. So it clearly depends upon the team’s situation. Some teams have nothing else; some already have an established starter (like the Colts today) and have picked the new QB with the goal of development and hopefully starting in the future. Every situation is different. 
That said, Eason will unquestionably benefit from sitting and learning. He’s going to get his shot in 1-2 years. Until then, he’s The Apprentice. 

Oh I get that they both started, I’m just stating that they both could have possibly benefited earlier by watching a pro vet perform the routine tasks that they likely didn’t get to see in college ranks, regardless of how great they were. Manning was pretty savvy coming in already, likely benefiting from have a dad who was a pro qb as well as a football family. While Luck had similar set up with his dad also being a QB in the pro’s, he didn’t play with the same outward drive that Manning did (good or bad idk).
 

Luck played the game as we fans would like to see the game played, with fun and enjoyment his first few years until he took too many hits from guys who took it serious to hurt you. On the opposite spectrum was Manning, who took it so serious that at times, it didn’t look like any fun, it looked very much all business. To marry the two people would be great. Perfection and fun while playing a game. 

 

a bit off track there but I truly feel, even the great Manning could have learned a few things that took him a few years to understand by watching a guy in front of him play, process, plan and make adjustments from watching, even if that meant just a 1/4 or 1/2 of the first year. That’s just how I see it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, dw49 said:

 

 

McAfee is talking stupidly. He's not taking into account ....

1) The Colts did not even know if Manning could come back from that injury.

 

2) Money... Manning was due a 28 million $ signing bonus if he were not cut that March. They would have had to pony up another 22 million $ signing bonus to Luck... which they did.

 

3) McAfee must have forgot just how TERRIBLE that Colt roster was. It was devoid of talent and hand chance to compete for a SB. Yeah .. they did mange to sneak up on teams and pull some wins out of their butt , but no way they could get tom SB.Actually would have done Manning a disservice if they kept him. But #3 goes along with #2 , they could never invest that much money in the QB position with so many other needs.


4) You could never have a talent like Luck sit the bench for 3 years while Manning finished out his career, That's unheard of for a generational talent who was the first pick in the draft.

 

Bottom line is the Colts had a roster that called for a rebuild. They had the ideal situation to be able to start it with Luck. If they wanted to stay with Manning , it would have only made sense to trade pick 1.1 for a huge bounty . Made no sense to invest 50 mill in the QB spot and have Luck sit for 3 years. Surprised that McAfee said something like that.

 

He wasn't saying that overall looking that the whole situation that Manning should have been kept for a year.  He was saying that ideally, in a perfect world, IF Luck would have had that situation to learn from Manning from a year he thinks it would have helped him mostly because it would have made Luck feel like it was ok to be demanding as the franchise QB.  

 

He wasn't trying to say that the situation would have worked out well overall to keep Manning.  Just that Luck could have learned that bit from Manning if he just got to spend one season with him.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Moosejawcolt said:

Thats my point. He watches them take snaps.  I just beleive a lot of the mentoring is done by the qb coach.  I juat dont beleive Rivers has the time to put him undet his wings and guide him. So u r assuming that Brees mentored Rivers? 

Sorry, you made it sound like all he’ll learn from Rivers is work ethic. I disagree with that. He will learn far more than work ethic by watching Rivers. 
 

But I agree that Rivers is unlikely to go out of his way to mentor the kid. His main focus is winning a SuperBowl. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/30/2020 at 2:49 PM, Moosejawcolt said:

I am not a big believer in the mentoring of a younger  by an older elite qb in his twilight  years. The great ones are so invested in their own  careers. They take all the snaps and are busy and focused  studying film til late at night. Sure young qb can watch say Philips work ethic. It is the job of the qb coach and most likely Reich to an extent  to teach and groom Eason. Philips contribution is probably going to b minor. Painter and Sorgi  had one of the greatest and look at their development. I cant think of a young qb who developed under an older elite qb. Can u?

Well just about every quarterback who came in after a great QB before the late 90s did.

 

So current Great QBs who sat behind good vets.

 

Currently,

 

Mahomes obviously watched behind Smith.

Brees sat behind Trent Green who was very good to great at times.

Brady sat behind Bledsoe. 

Rodgers sat behind Favre.

Rivers behind Brees and Flutie.

Jackson sat for half a year behind Flacco.

 

 

I'd say most of the elite starting QBs sat for at least a while behind good to great aging vets.

 

Whether or not this is efficacious is a big debate. 

 

Wilson started very quickly because the QB was so bad.  Ryan started as a rook I think.  Watson didn't really have a mentor.  

 

From what I've seen, I think I would want to have my rookie QB sitting behind a good vet for a year or so.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

He wasn't saying that overall looking that the whole situation that Manning should have been kept for a year.  He was saying that ideally, in a perfect world, IF Luck would have had that situation to learn from Manning from a year he thinks it would have helped him mostly because it would have made Luck feel like it was ok to be demanding as the franchise QB.  

 

He wasn't trying to say that the situation would have worked out well overall to keep Manning.  Just that Luck could have learned that bit from Manning if he just got to spend one season with him.  

 

That makes more sense as I didn't think he was that stupid. There was no "reasonable" scenario that existed that could have allowed for Luck to speand his first season learning under Manning thus I had no clue that was the just of what he was suggesting.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think too many really know what mentoring is and to what extent a vet QB can help a rookie QB.

Pretty much all a vet QB can do for a rookie QB is to lead by example.

It's more up to the QB coach to teach footwork and mechanics. 

Personally I want Rivers to concentrate on himself. It's not his job to "babysit" a rookie. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Selected in the fourth round this year out of Washington, Eason was coveted for his elite arm strength with the hope that he could develop his all-around game learning not only from veteran quarterbacks Philip Rivers and Jacoby Brissett, but also from head coach Frank Reich, himself a longtime NFL quarterback and position coach.

Splitting third-team reps throughout training camp with Chad Kelly, Eason, according to Sirianni, made some significant strides forward in his development.

"I saw great arm strength, to be able to make throws outside the numbers; I see decision making continually getting better and better and better when he's dropping back to pass the football," Sirianni said of Eason.

Perhaps most importantly, Sirianni said, is Eason's improvements with his pre-snap responsibilities.

"I keep seeing improved (ability to) get us into the right play, get people into the right position, to do their job, handling the different looks the defense gives us," Sirianni said. "And that's very exciting.

"Physically the arm strength, the mental part of the game, is coming along," Sirianni continued. "That's very important, and (I'm) excited about that with Jacob's development."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I loved the praise he's getting from Sirianni. Seems like he's progressing well. All we can ask really. Both Rivers and Jacoby seem like good leaders that he can learn from. I love that he's there watching Rivers work. He will need to absorb a ton of information about being a QB in the league... the mental part of the game... developing a rhythm, commanding the huddle and tempo of the team, pre-snap reads and adjustments... there really aren't many better than Rivers in that aspect of the game. 

 

I want to hear how he's improving his pocket presence and feel for the rush, but I guess we won't really see that until he's put in a game situation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, stitches said:

I loved the praise he's getting from Sirianni. Seems like he's progressing well. All we can ask really. Both Rivers and Jacoby seem like good leaders that he can learn from. I love that he's there watching Rivers work. He will need to absorb a ton of information about being a QB in the league... the mental part of the game... developing a rhythm, commanding the huddle and tempo of the team, pre-snap reads and adjustments... there really aren't many better than Rivers in that aspect of the game. 

 

I want to hear how he's improving his pocket presence and feel for the rush, but I guess we won't really see that until he's put in a game situation. 

A key point to consider....    Eason may be doing all the rights things, and that’s good,  but will he continue to do the right things when it happens at NFL game speed? 

 

Right now, Eason is performing at practice  speed.   Next step up is pre-season game speed, which he obviously didn’t get this year, but he will next year.

 

The next level speed is NFL regular season speed.    And that’s MUCH faster.   NFL playoff speed is the ultimate test.  Those are the best defenses and they challenge everyone.  
 

I’m just saying Eason has a ways to go.  So far, so good.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stitches said:

I want to hear how he's improving his pocket presence and feel for the rush, but I guess we won't really see that until he's put in a game situation. 

This was my exact thought. One of the biggest knocks against him was how be broke down as soon as pressure came. I like hearing that he's doing well and progressing, but how will he do when he has a Von Miller, Khalil Mack, etc. flying off the corner at him.

 

Like you said, it's not something we'll actually see until he sees live action in a game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

A key point to consider....    Eason may be doing all the rights things, and that’s good,  but will he continue to do the right things when it happens at NFL game speed? 

 

Right now, Eason is performing at practice  speed.   Next step up is pre-season game speed, which he obviously didn’t get this year, but he will next year.

 

The next level speed is NFL regular season speed.    And that’s MUCH faster.   NFL playoff speed is the ultimate test.  Those are the best defenses and they challenge everyone.  
 

I’m just saying Eason has a ways to go.  So far, so good.  

Yeah, no doubt. I'm just happy to hear he's progressing and working hard. With so much % thrown at him pre-draft I thought there must be something for him to fall so much and for so many questions about his attitude to be in the air. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Chloe6124 said:

Sirriani had lots of good stuff to say on Eason.

Ditto Rivers. I'm paraphrasing but he said that Eason made a throw that made him (Rivers) go WOAH. Rivers said it was a throw that he couldn't make and Eason made it with ease. Then he said that he could have made the throw but he'd have needed to make it a lot earlier than Eason did.

 

The way Rivers described the throw made me think it was one of those deals were if #17 was throwing it, he'd have thrown it to a spot before his guy got open while Eason can afford to wait for his guy to get open before unleashing a missile cos he has the arm and accuracy to get the ball there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rivers said Eason's arm strength, particularly, has been impressive to see up close.

 

"He can really throw it," Rivers said. "I mean he threw the other day in individuals that I just shook my head a little bit and said, 'I can't do that. I can't make that throw.' He's got a big arm. Strong; seems to see it really well."

Link to comment
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...