Film Study on Hoyer
-
B/R articles.... I think my 6 year old nephew could compose better information.
Really...
I was going to stop after the first ludicrous example, but now, thanks to a certain someone chiming in, I have to look at the whole thing.
FYI, "someone", thru the first half the Texans put 8 or more in the box 6 times and we totaled 87 yards against that look. Sure sucks that a team that leans so heavily on PAP sees so many 8+ looks...
Example 1: The second frame was snapped after the ball was in the air. It's something one does when they want their point to be correct. But in this case it also "cropped out" the pressure in Hoyer's face that he had to throw over. Not an excuse, as there was ample room to drop in the pass and it should have been completed. Regardless... it was the correct read.
Example 2 (S5P3): The point at which the writer claimed the ball should be out is 0.6 seconds after the snap (my DVR slo-mo's forward at 30 fps). The ball was gone in 0.8 seconds... and at that it was rushed producing the errant throw and the poor throwing position the writer describes.
Hoyer did not drive into his back-peddle, hit his spot and set. His mechanics were off. I have no idea why, but a poor throw was the result. Fortunately the CB was beaten so badly by Gabe's quick out that he was fixated on him and not the ball.
Example 3: My film review has not gotten into the second half and I have little substantive comment. The "after" screen shot shows little sign of a pocket, so I suspect Hoyer did not stride well and the pass may have been errant. However, I also wonder if Gabe broke too far downfield as he is 5-yards past the line to gain. The writer's "throw open" comment seems a little misplaced to me.
On play 2 its 2nd and 11 we're in a 2TE 2WR spread and you can clearly see theyre playing a 5-2 (run defense) and only dropping 1 back and the other safety is spying the backfield (for the run). They never once step backwards, they're not scared of anything going over top of them.
Huh... here I thought the 5-2 look from a 3-4 D was its neutral, base defense... not a "run defense". On the other hand the ILBs are only 5 yards deep... no wait... that's standard, too... Must be a mensa-clever, "run D" disguise...
Are the CBs playing 10 yards off because "they're not scared of anything going over top of them"? Is that also why they started the play at the 36, but ended up inside the 35 with the nearside CB actually reaching the 33? BUt they did not move backwards so...
Nonetheless it's also weird how the up, "run support Safety" managed to back-peddle out of my 16:9 frame at the snap while "never once step(ping) backwards". Similarly odd that the deep Safety got from the 32 at the snap to the 27 without going backwards.
Apparently these Texan DBs were tricky fellas...
It's been well established that "someone" is an arrogant ass, but I at least used to think he was an honest one...
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
B/R articles.... I think my 6 year old nephew could compose better information.
Really...
I was going to stop after the first ludicrous example, but now, thanks to a certain someone chiming in, I have to look at the whole thing.
FYI, "someone", thru the first half the Texans put 8 or more in the box 6 times and we totaled 87 yards against that look. Sure sucks that a team that leans so heavily on PAP sees so many 8+ looks...
Example 1: The second frame was snapped after the ball was in the air. It's something one does when they want their point to be correct. But in this case it also "cropped out" the pressure in Hoyer's face that he had to throw over. Not an excuse, as there was ample room to drop in the pass and it should have been completed. Regardless... it was the correct read.
Example 2 (S5P3): The point at which the writer claimed the ball should be out is 0.6 seconds after the snap (my DVR slo-mo's forward at 30 fps). The ball was gone in 0.8 seconds... and at that it was rushed producing the errant throw and the poor throwing position the writer describes.
Hoyer did not drive into his back-peddle, hit his spot and set. His mechanics were off. I have no idea why, but a poor throw was the result. Fortunately the CB was beaten so badly by Gabe's quick out that he was fixated on him and not the ball.
Example 3: My film review has not gotten into the second half and I have little substantive comment. The "after" screen shot shows little sign of a pocket, so I suspect Hoyer did not stride well and the pass may have been errant. However, I also wonder if Gabe broke too far downfield as he is 5-yards past the line to gain. The writer's "throw open" comment seems a little misplaced to me.
On play 2 its 2nd and 11 we're in a 2TE 2WR spread and you can clearly see theyre playing a 5-2 (run defense) and only dropping 1 back and the other safety is spying the backfield (for the run). They never once step backwards, they're not scared of anything going over top of them.
Huh... here I thought the 5-2 look from a 3-4 D was its neutral, base defense... not a "run defense". On the other hand the ILBs are only 5 yards deep... no wait... that's standard, too... Must be a mensa-clever, "run D" disguise...
Are the CBs playing 10 yards off because "they're not scared of anything going over top of them"? Is that also why they started the play at the 36, but ended up inside the 35 with the nearside CB actually reaching the 33? BUt they did not move backwards so...
Nonetheless it's also weird how the up, "run support Safety" managed to back-peddle out of my 16:9 frame at the snap while "never once step(ping) backwards". Similarly odd that the deep Safety got from the 32 at the snap to the 27 without going backwards.
Apparently these Texan DBs were tricky fellas...
It's been well established that "someone" is an arrogant ass, but I at least used to think he was an honest one...
Really...
I was going to stop after the first ludicrous example, but now, thanks to a certain someone chiming in, I have to look at the whole thing.
FYI, "someone", thru the first half the Texans put 8 or more in the box 6 times and we totaled 87 yards against that look. Sure sucks that a team that leans so heavily on PAP sees so many 8+ looks...
Example 1: The second frame was snapped after the ball was in the air. It's something one does when they want their point to be correct. But in this case it also "cropped out" the pressure in Hoyer's face that he had to throw over. Not an excuse, as there was ample room to drop in the pass and it should have been completed. Regardless... it was the correct read.
Example 2 (S5P3): The point at which the writer claimed the ball should be out is 0.6 seconds after the snap (my DVR slo-mo's forward at 30 fps). The ball was gone in 0.8 seconds... and at that it was rushed producing the errant throw and the poor throwing position the writer describes.
Hoyer did not drive into his back-peddle, hit his spot and set. His mechanics were off. I have no idea why, but a poor throw was the result. Fortunately the CB was beaten so badly by Gabe's quick out that he was fixated on him and not the ball.
Example 3: My film review has not gotten into the second half and I have little substantive comment. The "after" screen shot shows little sign of a pocket, so I suspect Hoyer did not stride well and the pass may have been errant. However, I also wonder if Gabe broke too far downfield as he is 5-yards past the line to gain. The writer's "throw open" comment seems a little misplaced to me.
Huh... here I thought the 5-2 look from a 3-4 D was its neutral, base defense... not a "run defense". On the other hand the ILBs are only 5 yards deep... no wait... that's standard, too... Must be a mensa-clever, "run D" disguise...
Are the CBs playing 10 yards off because "they're not scared of anything going over top of them"? Is that also why they started the play at the 36, but ended up inside the 35 with the nearside CB actually reaching the 33? BUt they did not move backwards so...
Nonetheless it's also weird how the up, "run support Safety" managed to back-peddle out of my 16:9 frame at the snap while "never once step(ping) backwards". Similarly odd that the deep Safety got from the 32 at the snap to the 27 without going backwards.
Apparently these Texan DBs were tricky fellas...
It's been well established that "someone" is an arrogant ass, but I at least used to think he was an honest one...
Its amazing how you'll even argue with pictures. You can look at it, and yet you're saying "Well that's not the truth" Really? The picture is lying now?
This guy couldn't break it down any more clearly and you take his information, which is in great detail and example, and say "Well this is all wrong, my film study says otherwise" Great argument.
You're trying to make an argument that a guy who threw 30 incompletions didn't have a bad game.
Doesn't take a MENSA man like me to realize only an idiot would try to defend that.
-
Really...
I was going to stop after the first ludicrous example, but now, thanks to a certain someone chiming in, I have to look at the whole thing.
FYI, "someone", thru the first half the Texans put 8 or more in the box 6 times and we totaled 87 yards against that look. Sure sucks that a team that leans so heavily on PAP sees so many 8+ looks...
Example 1: The second frame was snapped after the ball was in the air. It's something one does when they want their point to be correct. But in this case it also "cropped out" the pressure in Hoyer's face that he had to throw over. Not an excuse, as there was ample room to drop in the pass and it should have been completed. Regardless... it was the correct read.
Example 2 (S5P3): The point at which the writer claimed the ball should be out is 0.6 seconds after the snap (my DVR slo-mo's forward at 30 fps). The ball was gone in 0.8 seconds... and at that it was rushed producing the errant throw and the poor throwing position the writer describes.
Hoyer did not drive into his back-peddle, hit his spot and set. His mechanics were off. I have no idea why, but a poor throw was the result. Fortunately the CB was beaten so badly by Gabe's quick out that he was fixated on him and not the ball.
Example 3: My film review has not gotten into the second half and I have little substantive comment. The "after" screen shot shows little sign of a pocket, so I suspect Hoyer did not stride well and the pass may have been errant. However, I also wonder if Gabe broke too far downfield as he is 5-yards past the line to gain. The writer's "throw open" comment seems a little misplaced to me.
Huh... here I thought the 5-2 look from a 3-4 D was its neutral, base defense... not a "run defense". On the other hand the ILBs are only 5 yards deep... no wait... that's standard, too... Must be a mensa-clever, "run D" disguise...
Are the CBs playing 10 yards off because "they're not scared of anything going over top of them"? Is that also why they started the play at the 36, but ended up inside the 35 with the nearside CB actually reaching the 33? BUt they did not move backwards so...
Nonetheless it's also weird how the up, "run support Safety" managed to back-peddle out of my 16:9 frame at the snap while "never once step(ping) backwards". Similarly odd that the deep Safety got from the 32 at the snap to the 27 without going backwards.
Apparently these Texan DBs were tricky fellas...
It's been well established that "someone" is an arrogant ass, but I at least used to think he was an honest one...
Its amazing how you'll even argue with pictures. You can look at it, and yet you're saying "Well that's not the truth" Really? The picture is lying now?
This guy couldn't break it down any more clearly and you take his information, which is in great detail and example, and say "Well this is all wrong, my film study says otherwise" Great argument.
You're trying to make an argument that a guy who threw 30 incompletions didn't have a bad game.
Doesn't take a MENSA man like me to realize only an idiot would try to defend that.
Its amazing how you'll even argue with pictures. You can look at it, and yet you're saying "Well that's not the truth" Really? The picture is lying now?
This guy couldn't break it down any more clearly and you take his information, which is in great detail and example, and say "Well this is all wrong, my film study says otherwise" Great argument.
You're trying to make an argument that a guy who threw 30 incompletions didn't have a bad game.
Doesn't take a MENSA man like me to realize only an idiot would try to defend that.
Gee, no one is saying Hoyer didn't have a bad game against the Texans, and was at least partially responsible for the loss. And I will say this- if defenses aren't afraid of Hoyer's arm, why are the corners playing so far off the receivers? Yes Hoyer made a lot of bad throws Sunday. Sheeze.
-
Really...
I was going to stop after the first ludicrous example, but now, thanks to a certain someone chiming in, I have to look at the whole thing.
FYI, "someone", thru the first half the Texans put 8 or more in the box 6 times and we totaled 87 yards against that look. Sure sucks that a team that leans so heavily on PAP sees so many 8+ looks...
Example 1: The second frame was snapped after the ball was in the air. It's something one does when they want their point to be correct. But in this case it also "cropped out" the pressure in Hoyer's face that he had to throw over. Not an excuse, as there was ample room to drop in the pass and it should have been completed. Regardless... it was the correct read.
Example 2 (S5P3): The point at which the writer claimed the ball should be out is 0.6 seconds after the snap (my DVR slo-mo's forward at 30 fps). The ball was gone in 0.8 seconds... and at that it was rushed producing the errant throw and the poor throwing position the writer describes.
Hoyer did not drive into his back-peddle, hit his spot and set. His mechanics were off. I have no idea why, but a poor throw was the result. Fortunately the CB was beaten so badly by Gabe's quick out that he was fixated on him and not the ball.
Example 3: My film review has not gotten into the second half and I have little substantive comment. The "after" screen shot shows little sign of a pocket, so I suspect Hoyer did not stride well and the pass may have been errant. However, I also wonder if Gabe broke too far downfield as he is 5-yards past the line to gain. The writer's "throw open" comment seems a little misplaced to me.
Huh... here I thought the 5-2 look from a 3-4 D was its neutral, base defense... not a "run defense". On the other hand the ILBs are only 5 yards deep... no wait... that's standard, too... Must be a mensa-clever, "run D" disguise...
Are the CBs playing 10 yards off because "they're not scared of anything going over top of them"? Is that also why they started the play at the 36, but ended up inside the 35 with the nearside CB actually reaching the 33? BUt they did not move backwards so...
Nonetheless it's also weird how the up, "run support Safety" managed to back-peddle out of my 16:9 frame at the snap while "never once step(ping) backwards". Similarly odd that the deep Safety got from the 32 at the snap to the 27 without going backwards.
Apparently these Texan DBs were tricky fellas...
It's been well established that "someone" is an arrogant ass, but I at least used to think he was an honest one...
Its amazing how you'll even argue with pictures. You can look at it, and yet you're saying "Well that's not the truth" Really? The picture is lying now?
This guy couldn't break it down any more clearly and you take his information, which is in great detail and example, and say "Well this is all wrong, my film study says otherwise" Great argument.
You're trying to make an argument that a guy who threw 30 incompletions didn't have a bad game.
Doesn't take a MENSA man like me to realize only an idiot would try to defend that.
Its amazing how you'll even argue with pictures. You can look at it, and yet you're saying "Well that's not the truth" Really? The picture is lying now?
This guy couldn't break it down any more clearly and you take his information, which is in great detail and example, and say "Well this is all wrong, my film study says otherwise" Great argument.
You're trying to make an argument that a guy who threw 30 incompletions didn't have a bad game.
Doesn't take a MENSA man like me to realize only an idiot would try to defend that.
Maybe he's saying a few pictures doesn't paint the whole picture of a football play. He didn't say they were good throws, just brought more perspective.
-
Noticing this, as well as lots of leaning back as he throws accounting for a lot of his under throws
Thanks... backfoot is kinda the ultimate fly-open, anti-stride.
It's not that backfoot throws don't hurt any QB's accuracy, but when you don't have excess arm strength to compensate...
One more thing if you could...
Please, along with the stride note how much pressure was being applied. Second half of my "theory" is that sometimes the pressure is real, and other times not so much...
Thanks... backfoot is kinda the ultimate fly-open, anti-stride.
It's not that backfoot throws don't hurt any QB's accuracy, but when you don't have excess arm strength to compensate...
One more thing if you could...
Please, along with the stride note how much pressure was being applied. Second half of my "theory" is that sometimes the pressure is real, and other times not so much...
Added a bit more, one in there specifically for the foot angle theory...seems to work that way often. Good catch.
-
Really...
I was going to stop after the first ludicrous example, but now, thanks to a certain someone chiming in, I have to look at the whole thing.
FYI, "someone", thru the first half the Texans put 8 or more in the box 6 times and we totaled 87 yards against that look. Sure sucks that a team that leans so heavily on PAP sees so many 8+ looks...
Example 1: The second frame was snapped after the ball was in the air. It's something one does when they want their point to be correct. But in this case it also "cropped out" the pressure in Hoyer's face that he had to throw over. Not an excuse, as there was ample room to drop in the pass and it should have been completed. Regardless... it was the correct read.
Example 2 (S5P3): The point at which the writer claimed the ball should be out is 0.6 seconds after the snap (my DVR slo-mo's forward at 30 fps). The ball was gone in 0.8 seconds... and at that it was rushed producing the errant throw and the poor throwing position the writer describes.
Hoyer did not drive into his back-peddle, hit his spot and set. His mechanics were off. I have no idea why, but a poor throw was the result. Fortunately the CB was beaten so badly by Gabe's quick out that he was fixated on him and not the ball.
Example 3: My film review has not gotten into the second half and I have little substantive comment. The "after" screen shot shows little sign of a pocket, so I suspect Hoyer did not stride well and the pass may have been errant. However, I also wonder if Gabe broke too far downfield as he is 5-yards past the line to gain. The writer's "throw open" comment seems a little misplaced to me.
Huh... here I thought the 5-2 look from a 3-4 D was its neutral, base defense... not a "run defense". On the other hand the ILBs are only 5 yards deep... no wait... that's standard, too... Must be a mensa-clever, "run D" disguise...
Are the CBs playing 10 yards off because "they're not scared of anything going over top of them"? Is that also why they started the play at the 36, but ended up inside the 35 with the nearside CB actually reaching the 33? BUt they did not move backwards so...
Nonetheless it's also weird how the up, "run support Safety" managed to back-peddle out of my 16:9 frame at the snap while "never once step(ping) backwards". Similarly odd that the deep Safety got from the 32 at the snap to the 27 without going backwards.
Apparently these Texan DBs were tricky fellas...
It's been well established that "someone" is an arrogant ass, but I at least used to think he was an honest one...
Its amazing how you'll even argue with pictures. You can look at it, and yet you're saying "Well that's not the truth" Really? The picture is lying now?
This guy couldn't break it down any more clearly and you take his information, which is in great detail and example, and say "Well this is all wrong, my film study says otherwise" Great argument.
You're trying to make an argument that a guy who threw 30 incompletions didn't have a bad game.
Doesn't take a MENSA man like me to realize only an idiot would try to defend that.
Its amazing how you'll even argue with pictures. You can look at it, and yet you're saying "Well that's not the truth" Really? The picture is lying now?
This guy couldn't break it down any more clearly and you take his information, which is in great detail and example, and say "Well this is all wrong, my film study says otherwise" Great argument.
You're trying to make an argument that a guy who threw 30 incompletions didn't have a bad game.
Doesn't take a MENSA man like me to realize only an idiot would try to defend that.
No... I was calling you a liar. You said the DBs "never once step backwards". In the Example 2 pics four out of four did. Care to address that rather than deflect to the article or statements I have never made?
No? I did not think so...
My only comments about the author were that he cherry-picked a late, freeze frame to support his Example 1 case of a "bad read" and made what IMO was a misplaced comment in his 3rd example. I watched the entire play and it shows the read in Example 1 was proper.
I already waste way too much time on you. It makes no sense for me to spend time upon more detailed explanations when you clearly fail to read or comprehend those I already post. Including, BTW, any of my three posts in this thread requesting that Purple look for specific flaws in Hoyer's mechanics... some of which your authority of the moment mentions in his article.
-
Its amazing how you'll even argue with pictures. You can look at it, and yet you're saying "Well that's not the truth" Really? The picture is lying now?
This guy couldn't break it down any more clearly and you take his information, which is in great detail and example, and say "Well this is all wrong, my film study says otherwise" Great argument.
You're trying to make an argument that a guy who threw 30 incompletions didn't have a bad game.
Doesn't take a MENSA man like me to realize only an idiot would try to defend that.
No... I was calling you a liar. You said the DBs "never once step backwards". In the Example 2 pics four out of four did. Care to address that rather than deflect to the article or statements I have never made?
No? I did not think so...
My only comments about the author were that he cherry-picked a late, freeze frame to support his Example 1 case of a "bad read" and made what IMO was a misplaced comment in his 3rd example. I watched the entire play and it shows the read in Example 1 was proper.
I already waste way too much time on you. It makes no sense for me to spend time upon more detailed explanations when you clearly fail to read or comprehend those I already post. Including, BTW, any of my three posts in this thread requesting that Purple look for specific flaws in Hoyer's mechanics... some of which your authority of the moment mentions in his article.
No... I was calling you a liar. You said the DBs "never once step backwards". In the Example 2 pics four out of four did. Care to address that rather than deflect to the article or statements I have never made?
No? I did not think so...
My only comments about the author were that he cherry-picked a late, freeze frame to support his Example 1 case of a "bad read" and made what IMO was a misplaced comment in his 3rd example. I watched the entire play and it shows the read in Example 1 was proper.
I already waste way too much time on you. It makes no sense for me to spend time upon more detailed explanations when you clearly fail to read or comprehend those I already post. Including, BTW, any of my three posts in this thread requesting that Purple look for specific flaws in Hoyer's mechanics... some of which your authority of the moment mentions in his article.
Hoyer is more than serviceable. With a good qb coach he could go far in the right system. Certainly best option available to you guys right now. Honestly his biggest issue is I don't like his deep ball capability, but with the right receiver (AKA Gordon) maybe that'll change a bit. He needs to tighten up his footwork and remember to square his shoulders before throwing, keep it more compact. The accuracy issues down the middle may or may not get better with practice and training, and I also if it's less of an accuracy issue and more of a comfort issue. He seems to over compensate for the underneath defenders.
Also, am I the only one who thinks his passes get tipped at the LOS a lot? I didn't keep track but it seemed to be a repeating theme game in and game out.
-
No... I was calling you a liar. You said the DBs "never once step backwards". In the Example 2 pics four out of four did. Care to address that rather than deflect to the article or statements I have never made?
No? I did not think so...
My only comments about the author were that he cherry-picked a late, freeze frame to support his Example 1 case of a "bad read" and made what IMO was a misplaced comment in his 3rd example. I watched the entire play and it shows the read in Example 1 was proper.
I already waste way too much time on you. It makes no sense for me to spend time upon more detailed explanations when you clearly fail to read or comprehend those I already post. Including, BTW, any of my three posts in this thread requesting that Purple look for specific flaws in Hoyer's mechanics... some of which your authority of the moment mentions in his article.
Hoyer is more than serviceable. With a good qb coach he could go far in the right system. Certainly best option available to you guys right now. Honestly his biggest issue is I don't like his deep ball capability, but with the right receiver (AKA Gordon) maybe that'll change a bit. He needs to tighten up his footwork and remember to square his shoulders before throwing, keep it more compact. The accuracy issues down the middle may or may not get better with practice and training, and I also if it's less of an accuracy issue and more of a comfort issue. He seems to over compensate for the underneath defenders.
Also, am I the only one who thinks his passes get tipped at the LOS a lot? I didn't keep track but it seemed to be a repeating theme game in and game out.
Hoyer is more than serviceable. With a good qb coach he could go far in the right system. Certainly best option available to you guys right now. Honestly his biggest issue is I don't like his deep ball capability, but with the right receiver (AKA Gordon) maybe that'll change a bit. He needs to tighten up his footwork and remember to square his shoulders before throwing, keep it more compact. The accuracy issues down the middle may or may not get better with practice and training, and I also if it's less of an accuracy issue and more of a comfort issue. He seems to over compensate for the underneath defenders.
Also, am I the only one who thinks his passes get tipped at the LOS a lot? I didn't keep track but it seemed to be a repeating theme game in and game out.
I'm not a qb mechanics guru, but yeah, a lot of Hoyer's deep passes against the Texans were head scratchers. He's had 2 really bad games, the Jags and Texans, but he hasn't had two in a row- yet. I hope that trend continues.
-
No... I was calling you a liar. You said the DBs "never once step backwards". In the Example 2 pics four out of four did. Care to address that rather than deflect to the article or statements I have never made?
No? I did not think so...
My only comments about the author were that he cherry-picked a late, freeze frame to support his Example 1 case of a "bad read" and made what IMO was a misplaced comment in his 3rd example. I watched the entire play and it shows the read in Example 1 was proper.
I already waste way too much time on you. It makes no sense for me to spend time upon more detailed explanations when you clearly fail to read or comprehend those I already post. Including, BTW, any of my three posts in this thread requesting that Purple look for specific flaws in Hoyer's mechanics... some of which your authority of the moment mentions in his article.
Hoyer is more than serviceable. With a good qb coach he could go far in the right system. Certainly best option available to you guys right now. Honestly his biggest issue is I don't like his deep ball capability, but with the right receiver (AKA Gordon) maybe that'll change a bit. He needs to tighten up his footwork and remember to square his shoulders before throwing, keep it more compact. The accuracy issues down the middle may or may not get better with practice and training, and I also if it's less of an accuracy issue and more of a comfort issue. He seems to over compensate for the underneath defenders.
Also, am I the only one who thinks his passes get tipped at the LOS a lot? I didn't keep track but it seemed to be a repeating theme game in and game out.
Hoyer is more than serviceable. With a good qb coach he could go far in the right system. Certainly best option available to you guys right now. Honestly his biggest issue is I don't like his deep ball capability, but with the right receiver (AKA Gordon) maybe that'll change a bit. He needs to tighten up his footwork and remember to square his shoulders before throwing, keep it more compact. The accuracy issues down the middle may or may not get better with practice and training, and I also if it's less of an accuracy issue and more of a comfort issue. He seems to over compensate for the underneath defenders.
Also, am I the only one who thinks his passes get tipped at the LOS a lot? I didn't keep track but it seemed to be a repeating theme game in and game out.
Compared to Wheezy at 6'4, I don't think Hoyer has significant tip issues. He's had a couple games when they have been more frequent; in others none have occurred.
Agree on deep ball... with good footwork 55 is about the limit... maybe 60 with a tail wind. But it is the footwork. So very good much of the time... varying degrees of bad the rest.
-
Hoyer is more than serviceable. With a good qb coach he could go far in the right system. Certainly best option available to you guys right now. Honestly his biggest issue is I don't like his deep ball capability, but with the right receiver (AKA Gordon) maybe that'll change a bit. He needs to tighten up his footwork and remember to square his shoulders before throwing, keep it more compact. The accuracy issues down the middle may or may not get better with practice and training, and I also if it's less of an accuracy issue and more of a comfort issue. He seems to over compensate for the underneath defenders.
Also, am I the only one who thinks his passes get tipped at the LOS a lot? I didn't keep track but it seemed to be a repeating theme game in and game out.
I'm not a qb mechanics guru, but yeah, a lot of Hoyer's deep passes against the Texans were head scratchers. He's had 2 really bad games, the Jags and Texans, but he hasn't had two in a row- yet. I hope that trend continues.
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