Richardson 2 minute drive and after

[DougDew]

1 hour ago, Superman said:

The bolded is not reasonable analysis. A good passing attack includes mix and balance.

 

And I'm not questioning whether Steichen felt his gameplan would give the team the best chance to win. Of course he did. The question is whether his gameplan DID give the team the best chance to win.

 

 I don't know how any fan could answer your question, since I would think that starting off any game with high percentage passes would always be the preferred GP. Its just a matter of deciding what kind of passes those are with AR as QB.  I'm assuming SS thought that the longer passes were higher percentage for AR than what we think of typically  as higher percentage passes.  Again, speculation.....factoring in the 25% chance of a pass near the LOS being errant and the consequences of it being picked.   IOW, contrary to what you believe, maybe SS thinks AR can't really throw a screen pass very well.....every time...and practice is the place to learn it and not a game.....where winning the game is his primary focus and not ARs development.

  

 

 

 

 

[ColtStrong2013]

2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

 IOW, contrary to what you believe, maybe SS thinks AR can't really throw a screen pass very well.....every time...and practice is the place to learn it and not a game.

I’m highlighting this statement because I agree with you entirely. But what many on this forum I think fail to realize is that in order for Richardson to get the reps he needs, he has to be the starting quarterback of this franchise. Backup quarterbacks, even if the franchise puts a premium on trying to develop, do not get those reps in practice. He needs starting reps, both game but especially practice. That’s where he’ll develop. 

[DougDew]

4 minutes ago, ColtStrong2013 said:

I’m highlighting this statement because I agree with you entirely. But what many on this forum I think fail to realize is that in order for Richardson to get the reps he needs, he has to be the starting quarterback of this franchise. Backup quarterbacks, even if the franchise puts a premium on trying to develop, do not get those reps in practice. He needs starting reps, both game but especially practice. That’s where he’ll develop. 

I agree.  Flacco should sit unless AR can't play...and I don't even know what "can't play" means when it comes to AR.

 

[stitches]

Are we really arguing if AR can throw a screen pass? I have been pretty critical of AR's play but this is getting ridiculous...

[Superman]

16 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I don't know how any fan could answer your question, since I would think that starting off any game with high percentage passes would always be the preferred GP.

 

I think that's weak. But if your counter is 'we don't know whether a different approach would have worked better,' fine. I'm not claiming to have definitive solutions. 

 

What I'm saying is that I believe the Colts should do a better job of taking pressure off of the QB, especially early in the game. And one way of doing that is to scheme shorter passing attempts. I don't have a problem with scheming up an early deep shot to exploit a perceived weakness, but if the opening script only produces contested passing attempts, I think that's a gameplan failure.

 

Quote

I'm assuming SS thought that the longer passes were higher percentage for AR than what we think of typically  as higher percentage passes.  Again, speculation.....factoring in the 25% chance of a pass near the LOS being errant and the consequences of it being picked.   IOW, contrary to what you believe, maybe SS thinks AR can't really throw a screen pass very well.....every time...and practice is the place to learn it and not a game.....where winning the game is his primary focus and not ARs development.

 

This requires a very cynical viewpoint, not only of Richardson's ability, but also of Steichen's evaluation of Richardson's ability. And it doesn't match what we see happening on game day. There have been schemed short passes at or near the line of scrimmage all season, including on Sunday. But on Sunday, they didn't show up until the second half. 

 

Again, some of you are going way overboard with this perception of Richardson as someone who is incapable of making routine throws. We all know he's inconsistent and will miss throws that make us all groan, but he can throw a simple screen pass, and we all know it. 

[cdgacoltsfan]

1 hour ago, JAS90 said:

 

Please review any pre-draft analysis on AR, all his weaknesses remain the same. He is the exact same mediocre player he was at Florida. Is he the worst QB of all time? No. Is he below average in a lot of important QB traits? Yes. Colts fans want to believe what he might be vs what he actually is. 99% of people of who watch NFL will agree with me, this forum is in lalaland. 

I'd rather reside in "lalaland" vs where you reside ..bizzarro world.

[Superman]

9 minutes ago, stitches said:

Are we really arguing if AR can throw a screen pass? I have been pretty critical of AR's play but this is getting ridiculous...

 

It's like the twilight zone.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I thought colts did a good job figuring out how to keep pressure off in the second half. They ran AR more and that  resulted in some good runs for AR and the RB. He had some good passes mixed in that too. 

[DougDew]

28 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

 

What I'm saying is that I believe the Colts should do a better job of taking pressure off of the QB, especially early in the game. And one way of doing that is to scheme shorter passing attempts. I don't have a problem with scheming up an early deep shot to exploit a perceived weakness, but if the opening script only produces contested passing attempts, I think that's a gameplan failure.

Not disagreeing with what I think a proper GP looks like.  But I fall short of altering the GP because one QB should be made more comfortable than others, which I think is an element of the argument that I don't think a HC cares about.  At the end, he calls plays he thinks has a better chance of being executed...or...is looking to "establish the long pass threat early" to set something else up that you or I don't envision.   I've mentioned several reasons for why he might think his GP was better than what you and I would normally think.  I'm saying I think its for a reason you are not considering, that I don't know either, more so than he ignored the benefits of getting his QB comfortable.

28 minutes ago, Superman said:

This requires a very cynical viewpoint, not only of Richardson's ability, but also of Steichen's evaluation of Richardson's ability. And it doesn't match what we see happening on game day. There have been schemed short passes at or near the line of scrimmage all season, including on Sunday. But on Sunday, they didn't show up until the second half. 

 

Again, some of you are going way overboard with this perception of Richardson as someone who is incapable of making routine throws. We all know he's inconsistent and will miss throws that make us all groan, but he can throw a simple screen pass, and we all know it. 

 

Not cynical.  Plausible that Shane sees AR whiffing on 25% of his short passes, thereby lowering those high percentage passes to merely meh percentage passes.  Which blows up the narrative about what a high percentage pass actually is when AR is throwing them.  

 

35 minutes ago, stitches said:

Are we really arguing if AR can throw a screen pass? I have been pretty critical of AR's play but this is getting ridiculous..

The answer is no....from my end.....but the strawman argument seems to persist.

 

I said, clearly, three times now, that SS might not have comfort that AR can throw a screen pass....or any short pass....accurately EVERY TIME (or at any given time)...not...... AT ALL.

 

Because, if percentages are discussed, its helpful to understand math.  If AR has a higher percentage of passes that are inaccurate...then those "high percentage passes" aren't really as "high percentage" as what we think.  And Yes, Shane may think differently about what is high percentage, low percentage...or just about the same percentage as any other pass...so why not go for the chunk yards if the completion percentage is the same either way?

 

Do you believe in the reports before the draft that he struggled with short passes?  How does that impact play calling and a coaches view of what is a high percentage throw is and what isn't....if the HC is trying to win the game and not use the game as a live practice session to develop his QB?   I can't even believe I'm being argued with.

 

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Not disagreeing with what I think a proper GP looks like.  But I fall short of altering the GP because one QB should be made more comfortable than others, which I think is an element of the argument that I don't think a HC cares about.  At the end, he calls plays he thinks has a better chance of being executed...or...is looking to "establish the long pass threat early" to set something else up that you or I don't envision.   I've mentioned several reasons for why he might think his GP was better than what you and I would normally think.  I'm saying I think its for a reason you are not considering, that I don't know either, more so than he ignored the benefits of getting his QB comfortable.

 

I don't know how someone can watch the offense only produce highly contested pass attempts, mostly well down the field, for almost the entire first half, and not understand why it would be good for the gameplan to scheme short attempts early in the game.

 

You keep coming back to 'Steichen must have had a good reason!' There's no question that Steichen carefully prepared his gameplan, based on what he thought would work. My point is that the gameplan should scheme easier attempts for the sake of the QB and the entire offense. If there's some unknown reason that keeps Steichen from doing so, that doesn't change what we saw on Sunday. 

 

Quote

Not cynical.  Plausible that Shane sees AR whiffing on 25% of his short passes, thereby lowering those high percentage passes to merely meh percentage passes.  Which blows up the narrative about what a high percentage pass actually is when AR is throwing them.  

 

This would assume that Steichen thought Richardson could effectively throw short passes, but only in the second half. 

 

Can't we just acknowledge that this is debunked? Richardson can throw schemed up short passes, we've all seen it, it's on tape. Why this narrative persists is beyond me. Let's be real.

[BeanDiasucci]

17 minutes ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

I thought colts did a good job figuring out how to keep pressure off in the second half. They ran AR more and that  resulted in some good runs for AR and the RB. He had some good passes mixed in that too. 

I like that second half Richardson. The first half Richardson, where the Colts seem to be trying to turn him into Dan Fouts, not so much. 

[DougDew]

13 minutes ago, Superman said:

I don't know how someone can watch the offense only produce highly contested pass attempts, mostly well down the field, for almost the entire first half, and not understand why it would be good for the gameplan to scheme short attempts early in the game.

 

You keep coming back to 'Steichen must have had a good reason!' There's no question that Steichen carefully prepared his gameplan, based on what he thought would work. My point is that the gameplan should scheme easier attempts for the sake of the QB and the entire offense. If there's some unknown reason that keeps Steichen from doing so, that doesn't change what we saw on Sunday. 

  

 

13 minutes ago, Superman said:

This would assume that Steichen thought Richardson could effectively throw short passes, but only in the second half. 

 

Can't we just acknowledge that this is debunked? Richardson can throw schemed up short passes, we've all seen it, it's on tape. Why this narrative persists is beyond me. Let's be real.

 

I think I'm pretty reasonable to offer plausible scenarios as to why Shane did not call a first half game we think would be fairly obvious to call....which could be related to ARs inaccuracies.

 

So, what is your reason as to why SS didn't?  He forgot? 

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I think I'm pretty reasonable to offer plausible scenarios as to why Shane did not call the game we think would be fairly obvious. 

 

So, what is your reason as to why SS didn't?  He forgot? 

 

I'm not arguing the why. Steichen could explain his gameplan in full detail, and I might completely understand why he made the choices he made.

 

His gameplan still resulted in almost every pass attempt in the first half being highly contested, and mostly well downfield. The results being what they were, my argument remains that I think the Colts should scheme easier, shorter pass attempts -- screens, shallow crosses, etc., using commonplace concepts -- especially in the early part of the game. That approach would be good for the QB, the rest of the offense, and the team in general. If the Colts employed this approach and the results were poor, I would expect them to make further adjustments.

 

Your argument seems to be a combination of 'Steichen knows what he's doing' and 'Steichen must not think Richardson can reliably hit short passes.' I don't think that response is compelling or reasonable. In fact, I think it's outrageous. 

[runthepost]

2 hours ago, Solid84 said:

The talk was the same though early on for Jackson. Many didn't believe he'd ever be a pocker passer either.

Even then earlier on he had better mechanics compared to AR, also he was more experienced in college with 14 more games played.

[OLD FAN MAN]

On 10/21/2024 at 10:23 AM, runthepost said:

I liked that they used him to his strengths but only negative is him running up the middle constantly and not protecting himself. 

shane seems to call a lot of up the gut plays that dont work, kind of like frank, imo we need more outside runs and pitch outs

[Superman]

3 minutes ago, runthepost said:

Even then earlier on he had better mechanics compared to AR, also he was more experienced in college with 14 more games played.

 

Lamar's mechanics were very questionable, although in different ways. I would argue that Richardson's throwing mechanics in college were better than Lamar's. Lamar has made significant corrections and improvements to his throwing motion over the years, though.

 

The real difference is that Lamar was a Heisman winner with a TON of college production, both as a passer and a runner. He might never have improved as a passer, and he still would have at least had a decent baseline as an NFL player. Richardson's college production isn't even close, and because he had so much less experience, he was much more of a project.

[stitches]

32 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I said, clearly, three times now, that SS might not have comfort that AR can throw a screen pass....or any short pass....accurately EVERY TIME (or at any given time)...not...... AT ALL.

 

Because, if percentages are discussed, its helpful to understand math.  If AR has a higher percentage of passes that are inaccurate...then those "high percentage passes" aren't really as "high percentage" as what we think.  And Yes, Shane may think differently about what is high percentage, low percentage...or just about the same percentage as any other pass...so why not go for the chunk yards if the completion percentage is the same either way?

I might agree with you if we actually had any evidence for that. We've seen Steichen give AR both short passes and screens in most games... he just didn't seem to rely on those early in this game. I personally haven't noticed him having any trouble with screen passes. Do we have any evidence for that actually? 

 

32 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Do you believe in the reports before the draft that he struggled with short passes?  How does that impact play calling and a coaches view of what is a high percentage throw is and what isn't....if the HC is trying to win the game and not use the game as a live practice session to develop his QB?   I can't even believe I'm being argued with.

 

Yes. He did struggle with short passes in college. But that's all comperative. His completion % was lower than average on short passes... it wasn't lower... or the same level as his completion on intermediate-deep passes. I don't have the numbers right now, although I personally have posted them here. By memory(don't hold me to this) his short yardage throws he was completing at like 65% while the average was something like 70-72%. I don't think this should be stopping any coach from using that part of the field with a QB like this. Especially if you are actually trying to develop that QB and you are trying to give him more and more reps like this so he can work on it. 

[DougDew]

6 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I'm not arguing the why. Steichen could explain his gameplan in full detail, and I might completely understand why he made the choices he made.

 

His gameplan still resulted in almost every pass attempt in the first half being highly contested, and mostly well downfield. The results being what they were, my argument remains that I think the Colts should scheme easier, shorter pass attempts -- screens, shallow crosses, etc., using commonplace concepts -- especially in the early part of the game. That approach would be good for the QB, the rest of the offense, and the team in general. If the Colts employed this approach and the results were poor, I would expect them to make further adjustments.

 

Your argument seems to be a combination of 'Steichen knows what he's doing' and 'Steichen must not think Richardson can reliably hit short passes.' I don't think that response is compelling or reasonable. In fact, I think it's outrageous. 

You seem to be criticizing his game plan without bothering to understand it, by at least thinking about the reasons for it. 

 

I offered some possible reasons, which center around known and documented inaccuracies.  I think it would be outrageous to speculate around reasons we have no knowledge of.

[DougDew]

8 minutes ago, stitches said:

I might agree with you if we actually had any evidence for that. We've seen Steichen give AR both short passes and screens in most games... he just didn't seem to rely on those early in this game. I personally haven't noticed him having any trouble with screen passes. Do we have any evidence for that actually? 

 

Yes. He did struggle with short passes in college. But that's all comperative. His completion % was lower than average on short passes... it wasn't lower... or the same level as his completion on intermediate-deep passes. I don't have the numbers right now, although I personally have posted them here. By memory(don't hold me to this) his short yardage throws he was completing at like 65% while the average was something like 70-72%. I don't think this should be stopping any coach from using that part of the field with a QB like this. Especially if you are actually trying to develop that QB and you are trying to give him more and more reps like this so he can work on it. 

Fine, you can criticize my possible reasons, but I'm not really the one who is criticizing the game plan...to the extent it didn't succeed as probably intended. 

 

If you think its a bad GP, at least offer some attempts to understand it.  Otherwise, it tends to read like AR was a victim of SS's stupidity.  I doubt it.

[Superman]

Just now, DougDew said:

You seem to be criticizing his game plan without bothering to understand it, by at least thinking about the reasons for it. 

 

Completely false:

 

19 hours ago, Superman said:

Two other people in this thread have offered reasonable alternatives. Most likely, the intention was exploit a perceived weakness in the Dolphins defense. 'They've given up big pass plays, Richardson can hit big pass plays, let's test that out right away.' Also, the last time we saw Richardson, he was hitting big plays against the Steelers, so they wanted to pick up where they left off. All of that makes sense to me. 

 

 

2 minutes ago, DougDew said:

I offered some possible reasons, which center around known and documented inaccuracies.  I think it would be outrageous to speculate around reasons we have no knowledge of.

 

So I guess we're back to 'if Steichen did it, it must be right.' 

 

I continue to entirely reject the premise that the Colts don't think Richardson can execute these short passing concepts to a reliable degree. Once again, the Colts have called these concepts with Richardson all season, and they called them on Sunday, just not in the first half. It's ridiculous.

[stitches]

9 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Fine, you can criticize my possible reasons, but I'm not really the one who is criticizing the game plan...to the extent its a "bad" or stupid GP because it didn't suit me personally. 

 

If you think its a bad GP, at least offer some attempts to understand it.

I did. Just my attempt to understand it didn't include "AR can't throw screen passes so SS doesn't give them to him".

[DougDew]

22 minutes ago, stitches said:

I did. Just my attempt to understand it didn't include "AR can't throw screen passes so SS doesn't give them to him".

That wasn't my assertion either.  Why do you keep going back to that?

 

Just curious, if you believe the scouting report about inaccuracies in throwing, how do you think that would impact play calling?  Or do you think that a play caller who is trying to win the game in front of him just ignores it?

 

Do you think that throwing deep...like it helps to "open up the running game".....,also helps to open up the underneath passing game ( I read that it does, on the internet somewhere)  so that the WRs have more space to use their catch radius that they probably will need to complete the pass?  If you don't hit a few early long passes, keep trying for a while,  since MIAs offense was no threat to put the game away early.

 

I don't think I mentioned that possible smart reason yet for calling the first half GP,

 

 

[compuls1v3]

Just now, DougDew said:

That wasn't my assertion either.  Why do you keep going back to that?

 

Just curious, if you believe the scouting report about inaccuracies in throwing, how do you think that would impact play calling?  Or do you think that a play caller who is trying to win the game in front of him just ignores it?

 

Do you think that throwing deep...like it helps to "open up the running game.....,also helps to open up the passing game do that the WRs have more space to use their catch radius that they probably will need to complete the pass?  If you don't hit a few early long passes, keep trying for a while.

 

I don't think I mentioned that possible smart reason yet for calling the first half GP

 

 

I just want to say that it is entirely possible the gameplan didn't work in the first half, so in the 2nd half they adjusted, and it just so happened there were some short passes in it.  

[stitches]

6 minutes ago, DougDew said:

That wasn't my assertion either.  Why do you keep going back to that?

 

Just curious, if you believe the scouting report about inaccuracies in throwing, how do you think that would impact play calling?  Or do you think that a play caller who is trying to win the game in front of him just ignores it?

 

Do you think that throwing deep...like it helps to "open up the running game".....,also helps to open up the underneath passing game ( I read that it does, on the internet somewhere)  so that the WRs have more space to use their catch radius that they probably will need to complete the pass?  If you don't hit a few early long passes, keep trying for a while,  since MIAs offense was no threat to put the game away early.

 

I don't think I mentioned that possible smart reason yet for calling the first half GP,

 

 

I think a playcaller not only should take into account a player's strengths and weaknesses, but it's fireable offense if he doesn't. I think emphasizing the strengths is MUCH MORE clearcut, than avoiding the weaknesses though... especially for a QB and especially early in his career when you are actually trying to teach him stuff and develop his skills. 

[DougDew]

3 minutes ago, compuls1v3 said:

I just want to say that it is entirely possible the gameplan didn't work in the first half, so in the 2nd half they adjusted, and it just so happened there were some short passes in it.  

Right, but we all know that the stuff that worked in the second half was going to work in the first half if it was called, and there was no reason to call the stuff in the first half that we did because we should have known it wasn't going to work in the first place. 

 

That's the way I read this thread.    

[DougDew]

5 minutes ago, stitches said:

especially for a QB and especially early in his career when you are actually trying to teach him stuff and develop his skills. 

That gets back to my original question, should SS call a game to try to win it, or to use it as a live practice session to develop his QB?  

 

I don't think everybody here would have the same answer.  And I think most want a combo of both, but then it gets down to what to call on any given play.

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

7 minutes ago, stitches said:

I think a playcaller not only should take into account a player's strengths and weaknesses, but it's fireable offense if he doesn't. I think emphasizing the strengths is MUCH MORE clearcut, than avoiding the weaknesses though... especially for a QB and especially early in his career when you are actually trying to teach him stuff and develop his skills. 

Something I have never seen mentioned. Steichen is also learning what AR does well. He is still trying to build an offense around him that works. He missed valuable snaps last season that could have had Steichen starting this season having learned these things. Instead he is just now finding these things out.

[stitches]

5 minutes ago, DougDew said:

That gets back to my original question, should SS call a game to try to win it, or to use it as a live practice session to develop his QB?  

 

I don't think everybody here would have the same answer.  And I think most want a combo of both, but then it gets down to what to call on any given play.

I think a lot of it should be in conjunction with regular practice sessions. IMO he has to show some profeciency in practice for you to let him do it in live game. But I do think he should be doing things he's not considered great at even in live action during the games. I do think there is no substitute for live action of an NFL game. 

[jvan1973]

18 minutes ago, DougDew said:

That gets back to my original question, should SS call a game to try to win it, or to use it as a live practice session to develop his QB?  

 

I don't think everybody here would have the same answer.  And I think most want a combo of both, but then it gets down to what to call on any given play.

They can be both.   The kid hasn't played much football.   Every game rep is "live practice ".  SS is trying to win games,  obviously 

[jvan1973]

24 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Right, but we all know that the stuff that worked in the second half was going to work in the first half if it was called, and there was no reason to call the stuff in the first half that we did because we should have known it wasn't going to work in the first place. 

 

That's the way I read this thread.    

So you know the defenseive philosophy the dolphins played in the first half is the same philosophy played in the second half?   Obviously you do not.   You pick weird hills to die on.   

[JediXMan]

Winston unintentionally the funniest player in the NFL lol.

[Superman]

22 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

They can be both.   The kid hasn't played much football.   Every game rep is "live practice ".  SS is trying to win games,  obviously 

 

Right. Once again, these are not competing priorities. What's good for Richardson's performance and development is also good for the rest of the offense, and for the entire team. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

This is a great conversation on how Steichen is still trying to figure out an offense that works for AR.

 

 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

Zach is correct here. Colts have to be a run first team that builds exploding plays off that. You can’t come out with 3 shot plays and expect to be effective. 
 

Steichen did exactly this against Steelers and that why the offense looked so good.

[ShuteAt168]

3 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I think that's weak. But if your counter is 'we don't know whether a different approach would have worked better,' fine. I'm not claiming to have definitive solutions. 

 

What I'm saying is that I believe the Colts should do a better job of taking pressure off of the QB, especially early in the game. And one way of doing that is to scheme shorter passing attempts. I don't have a problem with scheming up an early deep shot to exploit a perceived weakness, but if the opening script only produces contested passing attempts, I think that's a gameplan failure.

 

 

This requires a very cynical viewpoint, not only of Richardson's ability, but also of Steichen's evaluation of Richardson's ability. And it doesn't match what we see happening on game day. There have been schemed short passes at or near the line of scrimmage all season, including on Sunday. But on Sunday, they didn't show up until the second half. 

 

Again, some of you are going way overboard with this perception of Richardson as someone who is incapable of making routine throws. We all know he's inconsistent and will miss throws that make us all groan, but he can throw a simple screen pass, and we all know it. 

Good grief. He’s completing 48.5 percent of his passes! If he were completing all these “routine throws” you mention, I have to think he’d be above 50 at least. At 48.5, he is missing routine throws and non-routine throws. I want an exciting franchise QB for my son and I to cheer for, but I can’t pretend AR is good at throwing the football right now. If AR was on another team, like the Titans, this site would be filled with comments about how bad he is. Just my 2 cents. 

[Moosejawcolt]

On 10/13/2024 at 5:17 PM, JediXMan said:

The fact he was sharing reps with Flowers was disgusting. 

 

On 10/17/2024 at 11:59 AM, BeanDiasucci said:

If you expect all of the commentary about your team to be positive and don't want to hear complaining, is a sports message board really the place for you? 😁 I can't imagine going to a forum designed for discussion, and telling the people there to be more or less positive—or to stop their praise or complaints about the team. Isn't the purpose of this place to share all points of view about the Colts? 

 

On 10/20/2024 at 5:55 PM, Dingus McGirt said:

True. That or The Steich finally gets it.

⁰

 

18 minutes ago, ShuteAt168 said:

Good grief. He’s completing 48.5 percent of his passes! If he were completing all these “routine throws” you mention, I have to think he’d be above 50 at least. At 48.5, he is missing routine throws and non-routine throws. I want an exciting franchise QB for my son and I to cheer for, but I can’t pretend AR is good at throwing the football right now. If AR was on another team, like the Titans, this site would be filled with comments about how bad he is. Just my 2 cents. 

I think there is a difference. For example Levis came in playing 5 years of college, I think.  He is still doing the same things at the pro level that he did in college. So one can assume he has hit his ceiling as he has shown no improvement in 2 years. In AR, u r dealing with a super raw talent.  Give him the full year and let's evaluate. If u look at Josh, it wasn't till year three he started to blossom. AR is morxraw thsn Allan. This is going to be painful to watch at times, but I am in it for the year at least. I think if he can string together some games,  U will see growth. If he is in and out of the lineup. He will never progress and most likely regress in his play. His number one thing at this time is not hitting a screen pass. It is finishing a game and playing the next.  

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

I think Steichen is sacrificing efficiency for explosion and that doesn’t really work. The Steelers game first to drives is how this offense should be.

[ColtAndOrioles]

1 hour ago, Restinpeacesweetchloe said:

This is a great conversation on how Steichen is still trying to figure out an offense that works for AR.

 

 

You would think after almost 2 years working full time on this that this should not be a problem.

 

It is very obvious what SS needs to do with AR. 

 

Roll outs.  Hurry up offense.  Lots of motion and options.  He always plays better that way.

 

Instead SS seems to want to make an AR into a Tom Brady.  It's mind bottling. 

[Restinpeacesweetchloe]

8 minutes ago, ColtAndOrioles said:

You would think after almost 2 years working full time on this that this should not be a problem.

 

It is very obvious what SS needs to do with AR. 

 

Roll outs.  Hurry up offense.  Lots of motion and options.  He always plays better that way.

 

Instead SS seems to want to make an AR into a Tom Brady.  It's mind bottling. 

All of this would have been worked out last season but AR got hurt.

[compuls1v3]

3 hours ago, DougDew said:

Right, but we all know that the stuff that worked in the second half was going to work in the first half if it was called, and there was no reason to call the stuff in the first half that we did because we should have known it wasn't going to work in the first place. 

 

That's the way I read this thread.    

I think you make a fair argument.  I will say that it would be nice to do something (I'm not calling what it is) that is easy for AR to do so he can get in a rhythm.  This really seems to be what his problem is, for most games.  I also think that might involve running more, whether it's him or the RB, regardless if JT is there or not.