Charting Quinn against the Vikings
-
@shepwrite said:
I wondered about all the shotgun as opposed to three step drops and quick slants. I also wondered about the lack of screens.I agree -- he wasn't great, but he wasn't horrible (like, say, Cutler and Delhomme). Three drops, three other passes that could've been caught, two passes wiped out by penalty, and a pick on a bad route by Edwards. He had three good downfield throws -- a TD, a drop, and a penalty.
I'd give it a C-, myself.
Shep I am with you (and Mangini) on this. I saw good and bad from Quinn on the game. I also so some questionable play calling in the game. I would give Quinn a C for the game.
You'll also note the number of times the chart shows Quinn was pressured. There were far to many in that column.
Masters said:
Shep I am with you (and Mangini) on this. I saw good and bad from Quinn on the game. I also so some questionable play calling in the game. I would give Quinn a C for the game.You'll also note the number of times the chart shows Quinn was pressured. There were far to many in that column.
Wow....you guys are generous...that was a F guys.
That attempted pass where he pretty much whiffed and threw the ball backwards is enough by itself to warrant a F.
I see that on cold, wet days...not sunny 75 degree days.
Has the guy had a rap of having small hands??
-
Masters said:
Shep I am with you (and Mangini) on this. I saw good and bad from Quinn on the game. I also so some questionable play calling in the game. I would give Quinn a C for the game.You'll also note the number of times the chart shows Quinn was pressured. There were far to many in that column.
Wow....you guys are generous...that was a F guys.
That attempted pass where he pretty much whiffed and threw the ball backwards is enough by itself to warrant a F.
I see that on cold, wet days...not sunny 75 degree days.
Has the guy had a rap of having small hands??
Wow....you guys are generous...that was a F guys.
That attempted pass where he pretty much whiffed and threw the ball backwards is enough by itself to warrant a F.
I see that on cold, wet days...not sunny 75 degree days.
Has the guy had a rap of having small hands??
Do you give Cutler an F for his game last against SD where he did the same thing?
It's one bad play (ok really bad). But Quinn isn't the first NFL QB I have seen do that, nor will he be the last. That stuff just happens when a QB starts on the run and then tries to pull back up to pass.
I am not going to grade a guys whole day on one play. If I did that, pretty much half the players in the league would get an F every other Sunday.
Though after Jason's explaination of the INT, I am going to lower the grade to a D
-
Do you give Cutler an F for his game last against SD where he did the same thing?
Sure...why not.
Thing is I don't care what Cutler or any other QB for that matter does.
We aren't comparing Quinn to anybody else. At least I am not.
It is all about him.
That can't be hard to understand. All that matters is how our team and our players play. How they play compared to other players isn't germane.
-
Do you give Cutler an F for his game last against SD where he did the same thing?
Sure...why not.
Thing is I don't care what Cutler or any other QB for that matter does.
We aren't comparing Quinn to anybody else. At least I am not.
It is all about him.
That can't be hard to understand. All that matters is how our team and our players play. How they play compared to other players isn't germane.
Sure...why not.
Thing is I don't care what Cutler or any other QB for that matter does.
We aren't comparing Quinn to anybody else. At least I am not.
It is all about him.
That can't be hard to understand. All that matters is how our team and our players play. How they play compared to other players isn't germane.
We are talking about grading a players performance for a game. Maybe you choose to grade Browns players on a different scale than other players. I don't. That was the point of bringing up Cutler. I am not going to pretend that play on Sunday was some monumental catastrophy that you never see from a legit NFL QB.
-
Jason,
Are you sure that was Cover 3 on that play? I am watching the reply of the play( http://www.nfl.com/videos/cleveland-browns...-vs-Browns-2009 ) and I am missing the cover 3 on this. I see the saftey on BE's side creaping up to the line and taking away a quick slant, 2 LBs following the both TE's release on the right side (MLB and OLB) and the other LB come up across the LOS. Doesn't seem like much of a cover 3 to me (maybe one of those variations on it?).
But I do see the window for a rope pass to BE on the inside. Of course I also see BE getting the CB to bite on the inside, and BE flashing like he is going outside but stays on his inside path.
-
interesting reply.....ironic coming from you.
maybe its wrong that im seeing the same behavior as last year, only now its brady's ladies defending against the charges of the DA fags. the role reversal is more amusing than the fact our "NFL-Ready" QB may not be so NFL ready.....
-
interesting reply.....ironic coming from you.
maybe its wrong that im seeing the same behavior as last year, only now its brady's ladies defending against the charges of the DA fags. the role reversal is more amusing than the fact our "NFL-Ready" QB may not be so NFL ready.....
interesting reply.....ironic coming from you.
maybe its wrong that im seeing the same behavior as last year, only now its brady's ladies defending against the charges of the DA fags. the role reversal is more amusing than the fact our "NFL-Ready" QB may not be so NFL ready.....
Not as amusing as your sole intention of getting a rise out of people, there's a reason you're always getting shit on.
-
if this is getting shit on, then you suck worse than you think.
turn up that dial if you think youre a man, then....cause this is bush-league shit right here, fella.
-
Jason,
Are you sure that was Cover 3 on that play? I am watching the reply of the play( http://www.nfl.com/videos/cleveland-browns...-vs-Browns-2009 ) and I am missing the cover 3 on this. I see the saftey on BE's side creaping up to the line and taking away a quick slant, 2 LBs following the both TE's release on the right side (MLB and OLB) and the other LB come up across the LOS. Doesn't seem like much of a cover 3 to me (maybe one of those variations on it?).
But I do see the window for a rope pass to BE on the inside. Of course I also see BE getting the CB to bite on the inside, and BE flashing like he is going outside but stays on his inside path.
Masters said:
Jason,Are you sure that was Cover 3 on that play? I am watching the reply of the play( http://www.nfl.com/videos/cleveland-browns...-vs-Browns-2009 ) and I am missing the cover 3 on this. I see the saftey on BE's side creaping up to the line and taking away a quick slant, 2 LBs following the both TE's release on the right side (MLB and OLB) and the other LB come up across the LOS. Doesn't seem like much of a cover 3 to me (maybe one of those variations on it?).
But I do see the window for a rope pass to BE on the inside. Of course I also see BE getting the CB to bite on the inside, and BE flashing like he is going outside but stays on his inside path.
Just as the ball is snapped you see both corners open up to the inside and drop. The SS (who's just barely on the screen) drops at an angle from the near hash to the middle of the field. That's your Cover 3 shell.
Underneath, the sam stays with the inside TE, the mike takes the outside TE, and the will stays with the back. The Free safety is in an empty zone. It's hard to say if that's a Cover 3 man under, or if the lbs are just making counts. The sam backer is definitely in man-to-man. But it's not uncommon to leave just that matchup. You have the two backers playing thirds with the safety and play 3 over and 3 under. If the 2nd TE releases, the sam has him one on one. The will is either waiting for the back to release in man, or waiting for someone to enter his zone. I can't tell what the mike backer's doing. That is either a zone drop or some of the worst man coverage I've ever seen. If it's a zone drop, it's pretty heady of the will backer to hang around the line because no one released into his zone.
It's a little hybrid coverage, it looks like. Maybe a Cover 3 Man look, just rolled over to the weak side. Either way if you're going to one of the outside receivers, you've got to read that as a zone.
-jj
-
Masters said:
Jason,Are you sure that was Cover 3 on that play? I am watching the reply of the play( http://www.nfl.com/videos/cleveland-browns...-vs-Browns-2009 ) and I am missing the cover 3 on this. I see the saftey on BE's side creaping up to the line and taking away a quick slant, 2 LBs following the both TE's release on the right side (MLB and OLB) and the other LB come up across the LOS. Doesn't seem like much of a cover 3 to me (maybe one of those variations on it?).
But I do see the window for a rope pass to BE on the inside. Of course I also see BE getting the CB to bite on the inside, and BE flashing like he is going outside but stays on his inside path.
Just as the ball is snapped you see both corners open up to the inside and drop. The SS (who's just barely on the screen) drops at an angle from the near hash to the middle of the field. That's your Cover 3 shell.
Underneath, the sam stays with the inside TE, the mike takes the outside TE, and the will stays with the back. The Free safety is in an empty zone. It's hard to say if that's a Cover 3 man under, or if the lbs are just making counts. The sam backer is definitely in man-to-man. But it's not uncommon to leave just that matchup. You have the two backers playing thirds with the safety and play 3 over and 3 under. If the 2nd TE releases, the sam has him one on one. The will is either waiting for the back to release in man, or waiting for someone to enter his zone. I can't tell what the mike backer's doing. That is either a zone drop or some of the worst man coverage I've ever seen. If it's a zone drop, it's pretty heady of the will backer to hang around the line because no one released into his zone.
It's a little hybrid coverage, it looks like. Maybe a Cover 3 Man look, just rolled over to the weak side. Either way if you're going to one of the outside receivers, you've got to read that as a zone.
-jj
Just as the ball is snapped you see both corners open up to the inside and drop. The SS (who's just barely on the screen) drops at an angle from the near hash to the middle of the field. That's your Cover 3 shell.
Underneath, the sam stays with the inside TE, the mike takes the outside TE, and the will stays with the back. The Free safety is in an empty zone. It's hard to say if that's a Cover 3 man under, or if the lbs are just making counts. The sam backer is definitely in man-to-man. But it's not uncommon to leave just that matchup. You have the two backers playing thirds with the safety and play 3 over and 3 under. If the 2nd TE releases, the sam has him one on one. The will is either waiting for the back to release in man, or waiting for someone to enter his zone. I can't tell what the mike backer's doing. That is either a zone drop or some of the worst man coverage I've ever seen. If it's a zone drop, it's pretty heady of the will backer to hang around the line because no one released into his zone.
It's a little hybrid coverage, it looks like. Maybe a Cover 3 Man look, just rolled over to the weak side. Either way if you're going to one of the outside receivers, you've got to read that as a zone.
-jj
Thanks for the break down Jason. I think you are right when you say that it might it's a hybrid. That's what I was kind of seeing when I rewatched it (zone for the corners and man for the LBs), but wanted your take on it.
While I think the read Quinn made could work against that coverage (maybe where Reggie Rucker was going when he was on Reghi), Quinn has to see to see that cover 3 up top like BE did. Of course if it was a hybrid, that's definately one of those "you got to play live games and see that to learn" type of coverages.
-
Masters said:
Jason,Are you sure that was Cover 3 on that play? I am watching the reply of the play( http://www.nfl.com/videos/cleveland-browns...-vs-Browns-2009 ) and I am missing the cover 3 on this. I see the saftey on BE's side creaping up to the line and taking away a quick slant, 2 LBs following the both TE's release on the right side (MLB and OLB) and the other LB come up across the LOS. Doesn't seem like much of a cover 3 to me (maybe one of those variations on it?).
But I do see the window for a rope pass to BE on the inside. Of course I also see BE getting the CB to bite on the inside, and BE flashing like he is going outside but stays on his inside path.
Just as the ball is snapped you see both corners open up to the inside and drop. The SS (who's just barely on the screen) drops at an angle from the near hash to the middle of the field. That's your Cover 3 shell.
Underneath, the sam stays with the inside TE, the mike takes the outside TE, and the will stays with the back. The Free safety is in an empty zone. It's hard to say if that's a Cover 3 man under, or if the lbs are just making counts. The sam backer is definitely in man-to-man. But it's not uncommon to leave just that matchup. You have the two backers playing thirds with the safety and play 3 over and 3 under. If the 2nd TE releases, the sam has him one on one. The will is either waiting for the back to release in man, or waiting for someone to enter his zone. I can't tell what the mike backer's doing. That is either a zone drop or some of the worst man coverage I've ever seen. If it's a zone drop, it's pretty heady of the will backer to hang around the line because no one released into his zone.
It's a little hybrid coverage, it looks like. Maybe a Cover 3 Man look, just rolled over to the weak side. Either way if you're going to one of the outside receivers, you've got to read that as a zone.
-jj
Just as the ball is snapped you see both corners open up to the inside and drop. The SS (who's just barely on the screen) drops at an angle from the near hash to the middle of the field. That's your Cover 3 shell.
Underneath, the sam stays with the inside TE, the mike takes the outside TE, and the will stays with the back. The Free safety is in an empty zone. It's hard to say if that's a Cover 3 man under, or if the lbs are just making counts. The sam backer is definitely in man-to-man. But it's not uncommon to leave just that matchup. You have the two backers playing thirds with the safety and play 3 over and 3 under. If the 2nd TE releases, the sam has him one on one. The will is either waiting for the back to release in man, or waiting for someone to enter his zone. I can't tell what the mike backer's doing. That is either a zone drop or some of the worst man coverage I've ever seen. If it's a zone drop, it's pretty heady of the will backer to hang around the line because no one released into his zone.
It's a little hybrid coverage, it looks like. Maybe a Cover 3 Man look, just rolled over to the weak side. Either way if you're going to one of the outside receivers, you've got to read that as a zone.
-jj
I have no idea if you're right or not...but it's a pretty impressive break down of a play.
You need to post more often.
-
LOL ... I only opened this thread because I thought the title read, "Charlie Quinn against the Vikings"
My bad ... cute charts though, he's getting better as the week progresses, just like Couch use to.
My bad ... cute charts though, he's getting better as the week progresses, just like Couch use to.
Except he doesn't throw 4 INT's like our benched QB did his first few games.
Did you even bother to examine DA's first 4 starts? Did you forget how piss poor his decisions were in 2006?
No?
Well your blind.
-
My bad ... cute charts though, he's getting better as the week progresses, just like Couch use to.
Except he doesn't throw 4 INT's like our benched QB did his first few games.
Did you even bother to examine DA's first 4 starts? Did you forget how piss poor his decisions were in 2006?
No?
Well your blind.
Except he doesn't throw 4 INT's like our benched QB did his first few games.
Did you even bother to examine DA's first 4 starts? Did you forget how piss poor his decisions were in 2006?
No?
Well your blind.
This isn't about DA...this is about BQ and how he plays. You want to compare him to Anderson??.....not me..lets compare him to Rodgers...both sat the first 2 years in the league.
Keep your eye on the ball.
-
Except he doesn't throw 4 INT's like our benched QB did his first few games.
Did you even bother to examine DA's first 4 starts? Did you forget how piss poor his decisions were in 2006?
No?
Well your blind.
This isn't about DA...this is about BQ and how he plays. You want to compare him to Anderson??.....not me..lets compare him to Rodgers...both sat the first 2 years in the league.
Keep your eye on the ball.
-
Masters said:
Rogers sat for 3 years in the league
Fair enough...we will see if BQ looks 2/3 as good then.
The point is he isn't a rookie.
Fair enough???
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login