18-38.......
-
no Johnny is someone who has made a few career starts....we don't know what johnny's career winning percentage will turn out to be with a sufficient number of starts. Because they haven't happened yet. But when you have 56 career starts....that's different.
It's the difference between saying a 13-1 nfl team is 'really good' vs a 1-0 team. The 13-1 nfl team we know is really good that year. The 1-0 team? Not enough information yet.
This is also a very elementary math concept that my 5th grade niece would get.....of course if simple fractions and percentages proved too much, perhaps that concept is a challenge as well.
Except that you're considering a multivariate comparison, which rarely ever determines anything with any sort of consistency. To get a truer comparison, you have to eliminate as many variables as possible.
If you want to get technical with math and stats, I can get technical. I don't think you'll like where the conversation ends up.
Don't belittle people because they made a simple computational error when your point is already fucking stupid.
Except that you're considering a multivariate comparison, which rarely ever determines anything with any sort of consistency. To get a truer comparison, you have to eliminate as many variables as possible.
Taco...
What TC is saying is that winning percentage is not the best means for evaluating a QB...
You're welcome in advance,
Tour
"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 -
Except that you're considering a multivariate comparison, which rarely ever determines anything with any sort of consistency. To get a truer comparison, you have to eliminate as many variables as possible.
Taco...
What TC is saying is that winning percentage is not the best means for evaluating a QB...
You're welcome in advance,
Tour
Taco...
What TC is saying is that winning percentage is not the best means for evaluating a QB...
You're welcome in advance,
Tour
*IF* all those losses have come about with multiple different organizations, then thats a bit different though.....he's been a L-O-S-E-R everywhere. Wherever he goes he loses games. That's a bit more telling.
But yeah, I'd agree that W-L alone arent a good way to evaluate a qb(although with a record like mccowns it does mean something I think)
What exactly in any evaluation does mccown do well at? His numbers? If you think his numbers are good, you are looking at the wrong numbers. Take sunday for example....yeah his qb rating is ok, but this isnt 1992. Qb rating is an incredibly flawed and often meaningless stat. It doesnt take into account his two lost fumbles. It doesn't take into account(proportionally) his piss poor 3rd down play. It doesn't take into account his refusal to take a shot into the damn end zone the whole game, which resulted in us not scoring(or even coming close) any touchdowns. His qb rating from sunday says he was ok, but any more sophisticated analysis would say he sucked.
Same thing in the denver game.....
-
So admit it than Tacosman. You are & always will be a JM Fanboy & that is fine. But what do you see in JM that our coaches have not seen in 2 years on the field? Oh wait. We will have 3 trends on this when he goes on the exemption list. see you then.. Josh gives this team the best chance to win on game day. JM is getting better on the field when he can stay on it. That's again on him.. Maybe JM gets his shot against a tougher Zona defense this week so we can compare to that god awful Rams D that beat Josh all day. Either way fit the story as you may.
So admit it than Tacosman. You are & always will be a JM Fanboy & that is fine. But what do you see in JM that our coaches have not seen in 2 years on the field? Oh wait. We will have 3 trends on this when he goes on the exemption list. see you then.. Josh gives this team the best chance to win on game day. JM is getting better on the field when he can stay on it. That's again on him.. Maybe JM gets his shot against a tougher Zona defense this week so we can compare to that god awful Rams D that beat Josh all day. Either way fit the story as you may.
i dont know if johnny could be good or not. And Im not a johnny fanboy. I'm a "don't run a 36 yo journeyman backup qb with an 18-38 career record when the season is lost already" fanboy.
As for the value of our coaches evals, I dont know how much they are worth. In case you havent noticed, our coaches sorta suck and are likely not long for their jobs. So excuse me if I am less than impressed with their eval. My eval is that I DONT KNOW what johnny can do. If he sucks for 5 starts, I wont be wrong....since I never said I thought he would be good. I DONT KNOW. And not knowing(and lets be honest our coaches dont really know either....if they think they know thats even more absurd and telling) with this team is a better option than one of the Mccown brothers.....(the less famous one...the brother with new orleans at least a few people know because of the commercial he is in)
-
It's dumb to put it all on McCown that he didn't play for playoff caliber teams and
didn't win much.
Who is to say that if not for McCown, their loses would have been even greater?
Those are TEAM LOSSES. As in, qb's with tremendous talent wr's,
and a very good defense, and an at least good oline...
gee, they are terrific qb's.
But, you let the same qb go to a team that has weak personnel, and that qb sucks?
Canton Mike and I argued about what qb in that draft a lot. I didn't want Manziel,
I didn't think he was a fit with the Browns. But he has a ton of talent, he's just
not tall, and all the worse than Broadway Joe stuff.........
But McCown isn't an elite qb, so he needs tools to work with. The ratbirds just lost again -
they have injuries - and one announcer was saying that Flacculence needed tools to work with.
So does McCown - he's doing a good job with what he has to work with. But JM doesn't have
the experience to make that happen enough. But, McCown is now hurt - getting an MRI...
JM surely is going to start next week.
-
It's dumb to put it all on McCown that he didn't play for playoff caliber teams and
didn't win much.
Who is to say that if not for McCown, their loses would have been even greater?
Those are TEAM LOSSES. As in, qb's with tremendous talent wr's,
and a very good defense, and an at least good oline...
gee, they are terrific qb's.
But, you let the same qb go to a team that has weak personnel, and that qb sucks?
Canton Mike and I argued about what qb in that draft a lot. I didn't want Manziel,
I didn't think he was a fit with the Browns. But he has a ton of talent, he's just
not tall, and all the worse than Broadway Joe stuff.........
But McCown isn't an elite qb, so he needs tools to work with. The ratbirds just lost again -
they have injuries - and one announcer was saying that Flacculence needed tools to work with.
So does McCown - he's doing a good job with what he has to work with. But JM doesn't have
the experience to make that happen enough. But, McCown is now hurt - getting an MRI...
JM surely is going to start next week.
It's dumb to put it all on McCown that he didn't play for playoff caliber teams and
didn't win much.
Who is to say that if not for McCown, their loses would have been even greater?
Those are TEAM LOSSES. As in, qb's with tremendous talent wr's,
and a very good defense, and an at least good oline...
gee, they are terrific qb's.
But, you let the same qb go to a team that has weak personnel, and that qb sucks?
Canton Mike and I argued about what qb in that draft a lot. I didn't want Manziel,
I didn't think he was a fit with the Browns. But he has a ton of talent, he's just
not tall, and all the worse than Broadway Joe stuff.........
But McCown isn't an elite qb, so he needs tools to work with. The ratbirds just lost again -
they have injuries - and one announcer was saying that Flacculence needed tools to work with.
So does McCown - he's doing a good job with what he has to work with. But JM doesn't have
the experience to make that happen enough. But, McCown is now hurt - getting an MRI...
JM surely is going to start next week.
The Arizona Cardinals were 7-9 the year before they drafted McCown. They were 5-11 the year after he left.
The Oakland Raiders were 2-14 the year before they grabbed McCown. They were 5-11 the year after he left.
The Tampa Bay Buccaneers were 4-12 the year before they grabbed McCown. They are, so far, 2-4.
It's not like he went to great teams, made them shit, and then left. He went to shit teams and then left them still in shit. There are infinitely more variables to consider than QB play.
-
Taco...
What TC is saying is that winning percentage is not the best means for evaluating a QB...
You're welcome in advance,
Tour
*IF* all those losses have come about with multiple different organizations, then thats a bit different though.....he's been a L-O-S-E-R everywhere. Wherever he goes he loses games. That's a bit more telling.
But yeah, I'd agree that W-L alone arent a good way to evaluate a qb(although with a record like mccowns it does mean something I think)
What exactly in any evaluation does mccown do well at? His numbers? If you think his numbers are good, you are looking at the wrong numbers. Take sunday for example....yeah his qb rating is ok, but this isnt 1992. Qb rating is an incredibly flawed and often meaningless stat. It doesnt take into account his two lost fumbles. It doesn't take into account(proportionally) his piss poor 3rd down play. It doesn't take into account his refusal to take a shot into the damn end zone the whole game, which resulted in us not scoring(or even coming close) any touchdowns. His qb rating from sunday says he was ok, but any more sophisticated analysis would say he sucked.
Same thing in the denver game.....
*IF* all those losses have come about with multiple different organizations, then thats a bit different though.....he's been a L-O-S-E-R everywhere. Wherever he goes he loses games. That's a bit more telling.
But yeah, I'd agree that W-L alone arent a good way to evaluate a qb(although with a record like mccowns it does mean something I think)
What exactly in any evaluation does mccown do well at? His numbers? If you think his numbers are good, you are looking at the wrong numbers. Take sunday for example....yeah his qb rating is ok, but this isnt 1992. Qb rating is an incredibly flawed and often meaningless stat. It doesnt take into account his two lost fumbles. It doesn't take into account(proportionally) his piss poor 3rd down play. It doesn't take into account his refusal to take a shot into the damn end zone the whole game, which resulted in us not scoring(or even coming close) any touchdowns. His qb rating from sunday says he was ok, but any more sophisticated analysis would say he sucked.
Same thing in the denver game.....
Lost everywhere... 4-3-0 as a starter in Chicago, but lost everywhere... 10-12-0 as a starter in AZ, but lost everywhere...
Sunday McC completed 80% of his passes... 80%. His YPA was over 8. He threw for 270 yds. He ran for 21 yds.
How many 3rd and manageable situations did he face? How many open receivers in the redzone did he "refuse" to throw to?
Yes, Denver was his worst game of the year. He was behind his receivers early and often. Completed a season low 51% of his passes for a season low 4.2 YPA and a season high 2 INTs.
Even a semi-sophisticated analysis can do better than "he sucked".
"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 -
*IF* all those losses have come about with multiple different organizations, then thats a bit different though.....he's been a L-O-S-E-R everywhere. Wherever he goes he loses games. That's a bit more telling.
But yeah, I'd agree that W-L alone arent a good way to evaluate a qb(although with a record like mccowns it does mean something I think)
What exactly in any evaluation does mccown do well at? His numbers? If you think his numbers are good, you are looking at the wrong numbers. Take sunday for example....yeah his qb rating is ok, but this isnt 1992. Qb rating is an incredibly flawed and often meaningless stat. It doesnt take into account his two lost fumbles. It doesn't take into account(proportionally) his piss poor 3rd down play. It doesn't take into account his refusal to take a shot into the damn end zone the whole game, which resulted in us not scoring(or even coming close) any touchdowns. His qb rating from sunday says he was ok, but any more sophisticated analysis would say he sucked.
Same thing in the denver game.....
Lost everywhere... 4-3-0 as a starter in Chicago, but lost everywhere... 10-12-0 as a starter in AZ, but lost everywhere...
Sunday McC completed 80% of his passes... 80%. His YPA was over 8. He threw for 270 yds. He ran for 21 yds.
How many 3rd and manageable situations did he face? How many open receivers in the redzone did he "refuse" to throw to?
Yes, Denver was his worst game of the year. He was behind his receivers early and often. Completed a season low 51% of his passes for a season low 4.2 YPA and a season high 2 INTs.
Even a semi-sophisticated analysis can do better than "he sucked".
Lost everywhere... 4-3-0 as a starter in Chicago, but lost everywhere... 10-12-0 as a starter in AZ, but lost everywhere...
Sunday McC completed 80% of his passes... 80%. His YPA was over 8. He threw for 270 yds. He ran for 21 yds.
How many 3rd and manageable situations did he face? How many open receivers in the redzone did he "refuse" to throw to?
Yes, Denver was his worst game of the year. He was behind his receivers early and often. Completed a season low 51% of his passes for a season low 4.2 YPA and a season high 2 INTs.
Even a semi-sophisticated analysis can do better than "he sucked".
You're looking at it wrong(in the rams game): instead of asking what he did wrong(and he did a lot wrong....two bad lost fumbles for starters), ask this- what in the hell did he do right? what positive plays did he make that led to points? Simply 'not making mistakes' isn't enough, and that's even if he wasn't making mistakes(but he is....a terrible pick 6 in the denver game, and then two lost fumbles sunday)
What I saw from mccown sunday was a lot of non-meaningful plays. An 8 yard dump off followed by a bad sack where he stepped into pressure and then a punt. His completion percentage on that sequence is 100% and his ypa is a solid 8, but it's not efficient qb play that leads to points. Drives kept stalling time after time after time sunday because Mccown wasn't making any meaningful plays. Points don't magically appear on the scoreboard in the nfl.....you actually have to make plays to get them up there. You've got to take that shot at the deep post route on 3rd and 4 that, if you hit it, that's 6.....we didn't see mccown do that at all. not even really take any shots. I would feel better about mccown in that rams game had he at least taken a few more shots.
When only 6 pts are scored in a game, thats *a problem*. That sort of performance, barring things like obvious dropped td passes(which there were none) or fumbles as guys are streaking into the end zone, has to start with the qb in terms of analysis. Now the question is- why did we only score 6 pts? In my viewing of the game it seemed like we mostly came to our pathetic 6 pt total because:
1) Josh was very very poor in managing the pocket. He had a knack to step right into the pressure instead of away from it. Thats been a chronic problem for him. Not saying JM would be better(I dont know), but Josh is killing drives with it.
2) Not super accurate on third down. A few times balls were thrown short of the sticks with the anticipation that a guy would run for the first down after the catch, but the ball wasn't thrown perfectly in stride. So even though it was caught no chance to get first down. 3) Just not being aggressive enough in taking shots down the field period.
I think those three things and some other things(no big runs for example) led to our absurd point total of 6. And yes a lot of that is on Josh.
-
*IF* all those losses have come about with multiple different organizations, then thats a bit different though.....he's been a L-O-S-E-R everywhere. Wherever he goes he loses games. That's a bit more telling.
But yeah, I'd agree that W-L alone arent a good way to evaluate a qb(although with a record like mccowns it does mean something I think)
What exactly in any evaluation does mccown do well at? His numbers? If you think his numbers are good, you are looking at the wrong numbers. Take sunday for example....yeah his qb rating is ok, but this isnt 1992. Qb rating is an incredibly flawed and often meaningless stat. It doesnt take into account his two lost fumbles. It doesn't take into account(proportionally) his piss poor 3rd down play. It doesn't take into account his refusal to take a shot into the damn end zone the whole game, which resulted in us not scoring(or even coming close) any touchdowns. His qb rating from sunday says he was ok, but any more sophisticated analysis would say he sucked.
Same thing in the denver game.....
Lost everywhere... 4-3-0 as a starter in Chicago, but lost everywhere... 10-12-0 as a starter in AZ, but lost everywhere...
Sunday McC completed 80% of his passes... 80%. His YPA was over 8. He threw for 270 yds. He ran for 21 yds.
How many 3rd and manageable situations did he face? How many open receivers in the redzone did he "refuse" to throw to?
Yes, Denver was his worst game of the year. He was behind his receivers early and often. Completed a season low 51% of his passes for a season low 4.2 YPA and a season high 2 INTs.
Even a semi-sophisticated analysis can do better than "he sucked".
@douche-nozzle said:
McCown is playing the position of QB as well as anyone in a Browns uniform in a loooooooong time! And because the rest of the team is pathetic you now want to see the little goofball play QB?
I want to see if we wasted another first round pick on Manziel- sometime. Pettine will decide when that is
Lost everywhere... 4-3-0 as a starter in Chicago, but lost everywhere... 10-12-0 as a starter in AZ, but lost everywhere...
Sunday McC completed 80% of his passes... 80%. His YPA was over 8. He threw for 270 yds. He ran for 21 yds.
How many 3rd and manageable situations did he face? How many open receivers in the redzone did he "refuse" to throw to?
Yes, Denver was his worst game of the year. He was behind his receivers early and often. Completed a season low 51% of his passes for a season low 4.2 YPA and a season high 2 INTs.
Even a semi-sophisticated analysis can do better than "he sucked".
OK- let's use ESPN "total QBR" if I may Tour. Based on that standard McCown is merely "average". I didn't surprise me he's dead last of all quarterbacks in sack efficiency. Josh might have a nice standard QBR, but FWIW- not only is Manziel's better- but Johnny Boy is currently ahead of Russell Wilson in that regard too.
Now I will to an extent give Josh a pass in the Rams game about being put in impossible situations due to penalties, like third & 20- or 30. But how many times were those long yardage situations due to him taking sacks? His consecutive sacks in OT against the Broncos cost us a chance at winning the game.
I will say with 100% confidence- Manziel has better pocket awareness than Josh, and is better at bailing out of trouble. And we're going to have plenty of that with no running game to speak of. MHO is Petting is being prejudiced ragging on Manziel for ball security- when it's been proven McCown is no better in that regard.
-
Lost everywhere... 4-3-0 as a starter in Chicago, but lost everywhere... 10-12-0 as a starter in AZ, but lost everywhere...
Sunday McC completed 80% of his passes... 80%. His YPA was over 8. He threw for 270 yds. He ran for 21 yds.
How many 3rd and manageable situations did he face? How many open receivers in the redzone did he "refuse" to throw to?
Yes, Denver was his worst game of the year. He was behind his receivers early and often. Completed a season low 51% of his passes for a season low 4.2 YPA and a season high 2 INTs.
Even a semi-sophisticated analysis can do better than "he sucked".
You're looking at it wrong(in the rams game): instead of asking what he did wrong(and he did a lot wrong....two bad lost fumbles for starters), ask this- what in the hell did he do right? what positive plays did he make that led to points? Simply 'not making mistakes' isn't enough, and that's even if he wasn't making mistakes(but he is....a terrible pick 6 in the denver game, and then two lost fumbles sunday)
What I saw from mccown sunday was a lot of non-meaningful plays. An 8 yard dump off followed by a bad sack where he stepped into pressure and then a punt. His completion percentage on that sequence is 100% and his ypa is a solid 8, but it's not efficient qb play that leads to points. Drives kept stalling time after time after time sunday because Mccown wasn't making any meaningful plays. Points don't magically appear on the scoreboard in the nfl.....you actually have to make plays to get them up there. You've got to take that shot at the deep post route on 3rd and 4 that, if you hit it, that's 6.....we didn't see mccown do that at all. not even really take any shots. I would feel better about mccown in that rams game had he at least taken a few more shots.
When only 6 pts are scored in a game, thats *a problem*. That sort of performance, barring things like obvious dropped td passes(which there were none) or fumbles as guys are streaking into the end zone, has to start with the qb in terms of analysis. Now the question is- why did we only score 6 pts? In my viewing of the game it seemed like we mostly came to our pathetic 6 pt total because:
1) Josh was very very poor in managing the pocket. He had a knack to step right into the pressure instead of away from it. Thats been a chronic problem for him. Not saying JM would be better(I dont know), but Josh is killing drives with it.
2) Not super accurate on third down. A few times balls were thrown short of the sticks with the anticipation that a guy would run for the first down after the catch, but the ball wasn't thrown perfectly in stride. So even though it was caught no chance to get first down. 3) Just not being aggressive enough in taking shots down the field period.
I think those three things and some other things(no big runs for example) led to our absurd point total of 6. And yes a lot of that is on Josh.
You're looking at it wrong(in the rams game): instead of asking what he did wrong(and he did a lot wrong....two bad lost fumbles for starters), ask this- what in the hell did he do right? what positive plays did he make that led to points? Simply 'not making mistakes' isn't enough, and that's even if he wasn't making mistakes(but he is....a terrible pick 6 in the denver game, and then two lost fumbles sunday)
I'd say Taylor Gabriel's first quarter fumble didn't help. Nor did the three sacks McCown suffered in the first half. What he did "right" in the first half was probably, in order:
13 yard pass to Barnidge for a first down.
9 yard run to get us a 2nd and 1 (that Crowell couldn't convert).
21 yard pass to Duke for a first down.
Draw defense offsides twice on two consecutive plays.
12 yard pass to Gary Barnidge for a first down.
9 yard run to pick up extra yards after both Thomas and Schwartz get called for back-to-back false starts.
11 yard pass to Johnson for a first down.
21 yard pass to Benjamin for a first down.
And that's just the first half.
What I saw from mccown sunday was a lot of non-meaningful plays. An 8 yard dump off followed by a bad sack where he stepped into pressure and then a punt. His completion percentage on that sequence is 100% and his ypa is a solid 8, but it's not efficient qb play that leads to points. Drives kept stalling time after time after time sunday because Mccown wasn't making any meaningful plays. Points don't magically appear on the scoreboard in the nfl.....you actually have to make plays to get them up there. You've got to take that shot at the deep post route on 3rd and 4 that, if you hit it, that's 6.....we didn't see mccown do that at all. not even really take any shots. I would feel better about mccown in that rams game had he at least taken a few more shots.
See, I saw something a little different. You know, because I actually watched the game. What I saw was Crowell fail to get a first down on a 2nd and 1, and Gabriel fumbling on our opening drive, and Johnson unable to get 3 yards on a 2nd and 4, or the offensive line allowing Aaron Donald a free pass at McCown, or back-to-back false start penalties that pushed us back to 3rd and 16. Those are the things I saw that you have yet to reference a single time.
McCown was left with 3rd and long on multiple occasions. The first time was due to our OL getting back-to-back penalties. Second time was due to a -5 yard run from Crowell, then a false start from Bitonio. Third time was due to a false start on Dray, followed by a holding on Barnidge, followed by a holding on Erving, followed by a holding on Thomas. Fourth time was due to a sack because our offensive line was unable to block Ethan Westbrooks for more than two seconds.
When only 6 pts are scored in a game, thats *a problem*. That sort of performance, barring things like obvious dropped td passes(which there were none) or fumbles as guys are streaking into the end zone, has to start with the qb in terms of analysis. Now the question is- why did we only score 6 pts? In my viewing of the game it seemed like we mostly came to our pathetic 6 pt total because:
Don't ever call what you do "analysis". To do so is to besmirch the term.
1) Josh was very very poor in managing the pocket. He had a knack to step right into the pressure instead of away from it. Thats been a chronic problem for him. Not saying JM would be better(I dont know), but Josh is killing drives with it.
2) Not super accurate on third down. A few times balls were thrown short of the sticks with the anticipation that a guy would run for the first down after the catch, but the ball wasn't thrown perfectly in stride. So even though it was caught no chance to get first down. 3) Just not being aggressive enough in taking shots down the field period.
Josh McCown is infinitely better on 3rd down, so I'm not entirely sure where you pulled this argument from.
1st | 51 - 78 | 65.38% | 429 yards | 0 TD | 0 INT | 79.5 Rating
2nd | 51 - 81 | 62.96% | 563 yards | 4 TD | 2 INT | 89.7 Rating
3rd | 44 - 59 | 74.58% | 688 yards | 4 TD | 1 INT | 128.4 Rating
I think those three things and some other things(no big runs for example) led to our absurd point total of 6. And yes a lot of that is on Josh.
Well, you were flat out wrong about 3rd down, in general. He's been phenomenal this season on third down. As for your other "points"...they were one-sided, to say the least.
-
TCPO- what was josh's third down conversion rate in the rams game? I watched the game(starting to wonder if you watched the game) and I saw a lot of throws short of the sticks. qbr(again its 2015, not 1989....what are we going to talk about rbis next?) doesn't take a lot of the things mccown sucked at in the rams game into account. I also wasnt referencing his third down on the whole season, but in the rams game. So not sure what your point was there. I didnt see plays being made on third down sunday that were meaningful.
As for mccown being left on third down and long a lot....yeah, and some of that is ON HIM. His pocket presence/awareness in the rams game was ATROCIOUS. Some of the worst I've ever seen. It's not like people are just blindsiding him right after his foot hits to plant....he's dropping back and can't move in the pocket worth a crap. He can't even guess where the pressure is going to shift. His instincts in the pocket are some of the worst I've ever seen. And it's killing us....it killed us in the denver game when he took that horrific sack when we had an > 80% chance to win(live line was browns -480 at that point) and it killed us throughout the rams game. That sack in the denver game still gets to me because the defense WON THAT GAME FOR US....they handed mccown and the offense the game on a damn platter, and then mccown goes out there when we are -400 or more to win both times and just pisses it away. Once was bad enough, but twice?!?!
Thats another thing that qbr doesnt take into account. But what does take it into account? the scoreboard.....and that glaring 6 up there on the scoreboard is proof of how piss poor josh's pocket presence was on sunday.
-
TCPO- what was josh's third down conversion rate in the rams game? I watched the game(starting to wonder if you watched the game) and I saw a lot of throws short of the sticks. qbr(again its 2015, not 1989....what are we going to talk about rbis next?) doesn't take a lot of the things mccown sucked at in the rams game into account. I also wasnt referencing his third down on the whole season, but in the rams game. So not sure what your point was there. I didnt see plays being made on third down sunday that were meaningful.
As for mccown being left on third down and long a lot....yeah, and some of that is ON HIM. His pocket presence/awareness in the rams game was ATROCIOUS. Some of the worst I've ever seen. It's not like people are just blindsiding him right after his foot hits to plant....he's dropping back and can't move in the pocket worth a crap. He can't even guess where the pressure is going to shift. His instincts in the pocket are some of the worst I've ever seen. And it's killing us....it killed us in the denver game when he took that horrific sack when we had an > 80% chance to win(live line was browns -480 at that point) and it killed us throughout the rams game. That sack in the denver game still gets to me because the defense WON THAT GAME FOR US....they handed mccown and the offense the game on a damn platter, and then mccown goes out there when we are -400 or more to win both times and just pisses it away. Once was bad enough, but twice?!?!
Thats another thing that qbr doesnt take into account. But what does take it into account? the scoreboard.....and that glaring 6 up there on the scoreboard is proof of how piss poor josh's pocket presence was on sunday.
TCPO- what was josh's third down conversion rate in the rams game? I watched the game(starting to wonder if you watched the game) and I saw a lot of throws short of the sticks. qbr(again its 2015, not 1989....what are we going to talk about rbis next?) doesn't take a lot of the things mccown sucked at in the rams game into account. I also wasnt referencing his third down on the whole season, but in the rams game. So not sure what your point was there. I didnt see plays being made on third down sunday that were meaningful.
As for mccown being left on third down and long a lot....yeah, and some of that is ON HIM. His pocket presence/awareness in the rams game was ATROCIOUS. Some of the worst I've ever seen. It's not like people are just blindsiding him right after his foot hits to plant....he's dropping back and can't move in the pocket worth a crap. He can't even guess where the pressure is going to shift. His instincts in the pocket are some of the worst I've ever seen. And it's killing us....it killed us in the denver game when he took that horrific sack when we had an > 80% chance to win(live line was browns -480 at that point) and it killed us throughout the rams game. That sack in the denver game still gets to me because the defense WON THAT GAME FOR US....they handed mccown and the offense the game on a damn platter, and then mccown goes out there when we are -400 or more to win both times and just pisses it away. Once was bad enough, but twice?!?!
Thats another thing that qbr doesnt take into account. But what does take it into account? the scoreboard.....and that glaring 6 up there on the scoreboard is proof of how piss poor josh's pocket presence was on sunday.
Until you can come up with a better metric for measuring the effectiveness of a QB, I'll continue to use passer rating - just like the NFL does. Just because it doesn't suit your argument doesn't mean it's not an effective enough way to measure performance set against the average.
I counted twelve different 3rd down opportunities that McCown had. He converted four of them. However, of those remaining eight, three were third and long situations that we were put in due to offensive penalties or poor running from the RB's. On those plays, McCown still completed passes or scrambled for 9 yards or more and the player went down only a yard or so before the marker. Hardly McCown's fault for not converting, when he or his receiver gets a 13 yard pickup on 3rd and 14.
So, if you were to list them.
- 3rd and 8 - Sack Fumble
- 3rd and 1 - 21 yard pass
- 3rd and 7 - Drew defense offside (no play)
- 3rd and 2- Drew defense offside (no play)
- 3rd and 1 - 1 yard McCown run
- 3rd and 2 - Sack
- 3rd and 5 - 2 yard pass
- 3rd and 7 - False Start
- 3rd and 12 - False Start
- 3rd and 16 - 9 yard McCown run
- 3rd and 8 - 21 yard pass
- 3rd and 13 - False Start
- 3rd and 18 - 10 yard run
- 3rd and 8 - 3 yard pass
- 3rd and 9 - 36 yard pass (wiped out/ Offensive holding)
- 3rd and 19 - 14 yard pass
- 3rd and 13 - 11 yard pass
After all of that, McCown was 6 for 6 for 72 yards on 3rd down against the Rams. There were only two third down scenarios where McCown dinked and dunked - on 3rd and 5 he threw a two-yard pass to Hawk and on 3rd and 8 he threw a three-yard pass to Benjamin. There was one time where he converted a 3rd and mid with a long pass, which was summarily called back due to holding.
As for how they got into these third and longs:
- There was a 3rd and 7 that turned into a 3rd and 16 because of two offensive penalties, neither of which were on McCown. On 3rd and 16, McCown picked up 9, which would have converted had our OL not jumped twice.
- There was a 3rd and 12 that turned into a 3rd and 18 because of a Bitonio jump. We ended up running a draw to Duke for 10 yards, rather than go for it.
- There was a 36-yard pass to Benjamin on 3rd and 9 that was wiped out because of a Joe Thomas hold. Then, on 3rd and 19, McCown was able to find Duke for 14 yards.
How were any of those aforementioned third and longs on McCown?
You are literally so wrong about everything you say that it's borderline sad.
-
tcpo- lmao at all the rationalizing and excuse making you did above....failing to convert is failing to convert. period. 6 points is six points. period.
And yes, there are FAR BETTER metrics for measuring qb than qbr. This isn't 1989 dude. Try reading some people who know what they are talking about with respect to efficiency ratings. Guys like Bill Barnwell and some of the other analysts at grantland. They sure as hell havent depending on qbr in ages. It's embarrassing that anyone would actually cite qbr in 2015 and you would be wise to avoid that in the future.
-
@douche-nozzle said:
I get that but that is as good as saying "we give up, throw the little goofball in there....what the hell" And I think Pettine & Company are more interested in earning the respect of other coaches and players more so than earning the respect of Browns fans who just want to try something different.
lmao....if that's what he is interested in, it's probably time to try a different approach than whatever this clown has been doing for the last 16 games or so. Because the only people/coaches inside the game who don't think Pettine is a giant tool only feel that way because they don't know who the hell mike pettine even is.
-
@douche-nozzle said:
I get that but that is as good as saying "we give up, throw the little goofball in there....what the hell" And I think Pettine & Company are more interested in earning the respect of other coaches and players more so than earning the respect of Browns fans who just want to try something different.
lmao....if that's what he is interested in, it's probably time to try a different approach than whatever this clown has been doing for the last 16 games or so. Because the only people/coaches inside the game who don't think Pettine is a giant tool only feel that way because they don't know who the hell mike pettine even is.
Because the only people/coaches inside the game who don't think Pettine is a giant tool only feel that way because they don't know who the hell mike pettine even is.
If it wasn't clear before....its completely clear now....you are talking completely out of your ass.
You have not one fucking clue what the rest of "people/coaches inside the game" think of him.
-
tcpo- lmao at all the rationalizing and excuse making you did above....failing to convert is failing to convert. period. 6 points is six points. period.
And yes, there are FAR BETTER metrics for measuring qb than qbr. This isn't 1989 dude. Try reading some people who know what they are talking about with respect to efficiency ratings. Guys like Bill Barnwell and some of the other analysts at grantland. They sure as hell havent depending on qbr in ages. It's embarrassing that anyone would actually cite qbr in 2015 and you would be wise to avoid that in the future.
tcpo- lmao at all the rationalizing and excuse making you did above....failing to convert is failing to convert. period. 6 points is six points. period.
And yes, there are FAR BETTER metrics for measuring qb than qbr. This isn't 1989 dude. Try reading some people who know what they are talking about with respect to efficiency ratings. Guys like Bill Barnwell and some of the other analysts at grantland. They sure as hell havent depending on qbr in ages. It's embarrassing that anyone would actually cite qbr in 2015 and you would be wise to avoid that in the future.
The "rationalizing and excuse making" is called analysis, you halfwit. It's not the same as "ANYONE IN THE NFL KNOWS THIS GUY IS USELESS BECAUSE I SAID SO" and then failing to actually provide any sort of statistical proof whatsoever.
Further, you do realize that QBR and passer rating are two different metrics? What about DVOA? Or DYAR? Are those more advanced for you? Because McCown ranks 15th in both, exactly where a player of his stature should be - just about average. Essentially any efficiency metric you will find will state the same thing - McCown is playing at, or within a negligible margin of, average.
I know your mommy told you that you were a smart little boy, but she lied.
I'm awesome, and I fuck dolphins. Ghoolie 12/2/2012: I have absolutely no skills, training or pride -
@douche-nozzle said:
I get that but that is as good as saying "we give up, throw the little goofball in there....what the hell" And I think Pettine & Company are more interested in earning the respect of other coaches and players more so than earning the respect of Browns fans who just want to try something different.
Let's be real here. We don't know if the players respect McCown more than Manziel. Pettine said and I quote "it's a bottom line business". OK, the bottom line is 2-5.
For those who fail to admit what that means- here's the sorry details. There's 9 games left. The 5-2 Cardinals are next. Two games against the undefeated Bengals. Two games against the Steelers with a healthy Ben Rothlisberger. Road games against the Seahawks and Chiefs.
The only games that look winnable (considering the current suckiness of play exhibited by the Browns) are the Ravens and 49ers.
So we're looking at two, or maybe three more (if we're lucky) wins- regardless of who the Browns quarterback is. If Pettine is willing to go down with the Good Ship McCown- so be it. It's taking on water, and listing to starboard badly Mike- in case you haven't noticed, but the fans sure have. I think its' worth pointing out- as others have said, that scenario will leave us going into 2016 not knowing exactly what we have in Manziel.
-
you two idiots will continue to cheer on mccown as he 'leads' us to winning one game out of every four.......I'll pass on that.
I've been a browns fan for awhile. Well before these two clowns(pettine and mccown) ever cashed a browns paycheck. And I'll certainly be rooting for them after pettine is shitcanned(and vegas thinks that may well be on black monday) and Mccown is cut.
So I'm able to look at the current shitshow starring Mike can't pick him out of a lineup Pettine and Mcclown and just shrug it off and wait for better days.....which in the nfl are always around the corner due to all the turnover. Fortunately that high turnover will also swallow these two clowns shortly. The rest of the nfl won't give two shits because they are so anonymous as is, but as a browns fan I will enjoy that day.
-
tcpo- lmao at all the rationalizing and excuse making you did above....failing to convert is failing to convert. period. 6 points is six points. period.
And yes, there are FAR BETTER metrics for measuring qb than qbr. This isn't 1989 dude. Try reading some people who know what they are talking about with respect to efficiency ratings. Guys like Bill Barnwell and some of the other analysts at grantland. They sure as hell havent depending on qbr in ages. It's embarrassing that anyone would actually cite qbr in 2015 and you would be wise to avoid that in the future.
The "rationalizing and excuse making" is called analysis, you halfwit. It's not the same as "ANYONE IN THE NFL KNOWS THIS GUY IS USELESS BECAUSE I SAID SO" and then failing to actually provide any sort of statistical proof whatsoever.
Further, you do realize that QBR and passer rating are two different metrics? What about DVOA? Or DYAR? Are those more advanced for you? Because McCown ranks 15th in both, exactly where a player of his stature should be - just about average. Essentially any efficiency metric you will find will state the same thing - McCown is playing at, or within a negligible margin of, average.
I know your mommy told you that you were a smart little boy, but she lied.
Further, you do realize that QBR and passer rating are two different metrics? What about DVOA? Or DYAR? Are those more advanced for you? Because McCown ranks 15th in both, exactly where a player of his stature should be - just about average. Essentially any efficiency metric you will find will state the same thing - McCown is playing at, or within a negligible margin of, average.
TC- I think I pointed out if you go by some other metrics- you're 100% correct. McCown is average. His career W-L is flat out terrible. Great qbs elevate the play of lousy teams- and for the record, Josh appears incapable of doing that. Is it unfair to say- based on fan expectations, that's not good enough? He's also terrible in letting himself get sacked, and holds onto the ball too long in certain situations that results in the former?
-
By the tacoboy rule we should be sitting Joe Thomas. How long has he been here and the browns still suck. I get it he's played every snap since being drafted, he's been to a pro bowl every year also. But year after year the browns end up with a losing record and he's one of the constants. Joe is a LOSER.
-
you two idiots will continue to cheer on mccown as he 'leads' us to winning one game out of every four.......I'll pass on that.
I've been a browns fan for awhile. Well before these two clowns(pettine and mccown) ever cashed a browns paycheck. And I'll certainly be rooting for them after pettine is shitcanned(and vegas thinks that may well be on black monday) and Mccown is cut.
So I'm able to look at the current shitshow starring Mike can't pick him out of a lineup Pettine and Mcclown and just shrug it off and wait for better days.....which in the nfl are always around the corner due to all the turnover. Fortunately that high turnover will also swallow these two clowns shortly. The rest of the nfl won't give two shits because they are so anonymous as is, but as a browns fan I will enjoy that day.
you two idiots will continue to cheer on mccown as he 'leads' us to winning one game out of every four.......I'll pass on that.
I've been a browns fan for awhile. Well before these two clowns(pettine and mccown) ever cashed a browns paycheck. And I'll certainly be rooting for them after pettine is shitcanned(and vegas thinks that may well be on black monday) and Mccown is cut.
So I'm able to look at the current shitshow starring Mike can't pick him out of a lineup Pettine and Mcclown and just shrug it off and wait for better days.....which in the nfl are always around the corner due to all the turnover. Fortunately that high turnover will also swallow these two clowns shortly. The rest of the nfl won't give two shits because they are so anonymous as is, but as a browns fan I will enjoy that day.
So as a Browns fan you are now rooting for the team to lose so that the coach and QB that you don't like won't play here anymore. Got it.
You're no Browns fan sparky....get the fuck out of here.
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