Browns looking at WR trade ?
-
Tour & TC,
I admittedly lack your technical expertise, but I AM a lifelong Browns' Fan who has (& continues to) lived through the positives & negatives over the years. It seems to me that Kiser is a hard worker who addresses mistakes as he plays & improves as games go on. He also seems to "self diagnose". That said, he IS a rookie & will suffer growing pains. I just hope that our media & Fans (many of whom are very negative) can be patient. I look forward to continuing posts from both of you (and others) charting Kiser's progress.
I think the kid is a winner!
Mike
IN DORSEY I TRUST -
Tour & TC,
I admittedly lack your technical expertise, but I AM a lifelong Browns' Fan who has (& continues to) lived through the positives & negatives over the years. It seems to me that Kiser is a hard worker who addresses mistakes as he plays & improves as games go on. He also seems to "self diagnose". That said, he IS a rookie & will suffer growing pains. I just hope that our media & Fans (many of whom are very negative) can be patient. I look forward to continuing posts from both of you (and others) charting Kiser's progress.
I think the kid is a winner!
Mike
Tour & TC,
I admittedly lack your technical expertise, but I AM a lifelong Browns' Fan who has (& continues to) lived through the positives & negatives over the years. It seems to me that Kiser is a hard worker who addresses mistakes as he plays & improves as games go on. He also seems to "self diagnose". That said, he IS a rookie & will suffer growing pains. I just hope that our media & Fans (many of whom are very negative) can be patient. I look forward to continuing posts from both of you (and others) charting Kiser's progress.
I think the kid is a winner!
Mike
I do too. There's a lot to be said for understanding the minutiae of the game, but even more to be said for understanding when some players just have "it". I'm not sure if it's something I can pick up on because I've picked a few stinkers in my time, but Kizer has always had a certain je ne sais quoi to him that is reminiscent of a lot of very good NFL QB's. It's something I thought I saw in his ND days and with each week I'm growing more and more convinced that he'll be the guy for us for a long time.
I don't think he'll ever be the guy who goes out there and completes 70% of his passes, throws zero picks and completely rips apart the defense pre snap a la Manning, but I think he'll be a guy who can go out there and extend plays, throw balls into seemingly impossible windows, and maybe have a few 400 yard passing games in his career when all is said and done.
I'm awesome, and I fuck dolphins. Ghoolie 12/2/2012: I have absolutely no skills, training or pride -
TC, I honestly have not seen it... not even a hint of it... so if you have a particular play in mind, please let me know.
Everything else I agree with... so he has a chance... but that last step is a big one.
One factor I may have overlooked completely is his being fueled by a desire to make Brian Kelly look like the ass many of us think he is. The way Kizer is now talking in glowing terms about his growing relationship with Hue gave rise to the thought of this possible "incentive".
Wanted to wait until I got home from work today to try and tackle this, sorry for the delay.
The first thing to address is the biggest part - we're obviously not going to see a full rtl progression from him this early on. For one, its preseason and the playbook is still being installed. Two, if Hue and Co. were smart (and it seems like they are), they'd likely adopt a strategy similar to what CAR did with Cam in his first year - ease him into the action by lining the playbook with plenty of half-field and and line of sight reads. And from what I've seen so far, that seems like what they're doing. In a large percentage of Kizer's snaps, you're seeing different variations of half-field concepts (smash, stick, hi-lo) allowing Kizer to read a single defender and make his decisions based off of their reactions.
You're not wrong in saying that Kizer oft locks on to his primary read. He does. But that doesn't mean he's incapable of moving through his progressions, as he's shown the ability to do that from time to time.
, Kizer is given a half-field read. He thinks about hitting the out but pulls down when he sees the corner sit, then pump fakes the go before pulling up to run. The out was likely the primary on this play and he rightly chose not to throw it...though, with his arm talent, I think he froze the CB enough to hit the sideline fly in the soft spot under the deep half zone.
Kizer is given another half-field read against a man look. What follows is essentially a field-side smash concept. His "primary" is Telfer who's running either a go or a deep corner and his "secondary" is the Z (Louis) who is running a corner if Telfer runs the go or an out if Telfer is running the corner. I used quotes there because the real read is the CB , if he jams the Z at the line and then sits in the flat, that's going to open up either the go or the corner route - the safety will have to choose. If the CB slinks out with the Z, it leaves the flat open for a swing pass. Obviously the latter happens. You can see Kizer's eyes go from MIKE to Telfer to the CB (where he almost pulls the trigger), then he pulls down and checks off to Dayes in the flat.
of a half-field read with the hi-lo concept worked well. The pre-snap motion sends the Z across (DeValve) and does two things, it forces the FS into man coverage and forces the OLB to hesitate on his coverage, freeing up the out route for Duke. Kizer fakes the handoff, turns around and has three options to choose from without having to turn his head.
, Kizer locks on to his primary read for most of it, shoots his eyes to the backside read after a few seconds, then looks upfield to run before hitting coming back and hitting the primary for a sizable gain. Doesn't really count, but I liked it.The deeper into the season we get and the more experience he gets, the more we'll see Kizer start navigating to his backside reads. But to say that there isn't a single example of Kizer progressing through his reads is hyperbolic. Head movement from sideline to sideline != progressing through reads.
, Kizer is given a half-field read. He thinks about hitting the out but pulls down when he sees the corner sit, then pump fakes the go before pulling up to run. The out was likely the primary on this play and he rightly chose not to throw it...though, with his arm talent, I think he froze the CB enough to hit the sideline fly in the soft spot under the deep half zone.Agree... and this makes my point. The route combo is designed to put the CB in a box. To work you have to read the CB, not progress from one target to another. Once the FS backpeddles on the far hash, you read the far CB. When you see the CB squatting on the flat you know you are going up the sideline. Keep the throw fairly flat and there's no way the CB recovers or the FS gets over. Plus getting the ball there quickly gives the WR a shot at juking the FS.
Kizer is given another half-field read against a man look. What follows is essentially a field-side smash concept. His "primary" is Telfer who's running either a go or a deep corner and his "secondary" is the Z (Louis) who is running a corner if Telfer runs the go or an out if Telfer is running the corner. I used quotes there because the real read is the CB , if he jams the Z at the line and then sits in the flat, that's going to open up either the go or the corner route - the safety will have to choose. If the CB slinks out with the Z, it leaves the flat open for a swing pass. Obviously the latter happens. You can see Kizer's eyes go from MIKE to Telfer to the CB (where he almost pulls the trigger), then he pulls down and checks off to Dayes in the flat.I'd need a 22 look to be sure, but I think Kizer was on Louis from the snap... likely on a deep curl given his inside release... but was covered. Telfer should have turned in and settled behind the LBs, but can't see if he did. That he never shows up for a block does make me think he turned in. Louis did show.
In any case kudos to Kizer's internal clock. A split second more and the DE that Sterup ole'd would have had a strip sack.
of a half-field read with the hi-lo concept worked well. The pre-snap motion sends the Z across (DeValve) and does two things, it forces the FS into man coverage and forces the OLB to hesitate on his coverage, freeing up the out route for Duke. Kizer fakes the handoff, turns around and has three options to choose from without having to turn his head.Again, what bothers me here is no evidence of him finding the Safeties... in particular here the FS who looks to be rotating over the top into an single high as the SS takes Devalve. Instead I see him on Hall from the time he snaps his head around.
Positives: Decent ball fake and route by Hall. Somewhere down the line I think the X clears and Duke turns his flat route up the sideline.
, Kizer locks on to his primary read for most of it, shoots his eyes to the backside read after a few seconds, then looks upfield to run before hitting coming back and hitting the primary for a sizable gain. Doesn't really count, but I liked it.lol... This viewing I actually came away thinking Kizer was reading the SS on the near hash post snap who he appears to see closing on the LOS in case Devalve released. And the very quick glance right after the pump may have been to locate the FS. It wasn't long enough to locate the 2 receivers to the right. Regardless he came back to his primary post haste.
But, yes, eyes downfield and one of the best TOR's in recent memory. Helluva a catch, too...
Thanks for taking the time.
"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 -
Tour & TC,
I admittedly lack your technical expertise, but I AM a lifelong Browns' Fan who has (& continues to) lived through the positives & negatives over the years. It seems to me that Kiser is a hard worker who addresses mistakes as he plays & improves as games go on. He also seems to "self diagnose". That said, he IS a rookie & will suffer growing pains. I just hope that our media & Fans (many of whom are very negative) can be patient. I look forward to continuing posts from both of you (and others) charting Kiser's progress.
I think the kid is a winner!
Mike
I admittedly lack your technical expertise, but I AM a lifelong Browns' Fan who has (& continues to) lived through the positives & negatives over the years. It seems to me that Kiser is a hard worker who addresses mistakes as he plays & improves as games go on. He also seems to "self diagnose". That said, he IS a rookie & will suffer growing pains. I just hope that our media & Fans (many of whom are very negative) can be patient. I look forward to continuing posts from both of you (and others) charting Kiser's progress.
I think the kid is a winner!
Expertise schmekspertise... all it really takes is time and some good HD replays that can be viewed over and over.
Totally agree on Kizer's self-awareness. I would not be surprised to learn that Hue's mentorship is as much to keep him from getting down on himself as anything else, but one of those anything elses is reading a D on the fly.... and that ain't easy.
I do too. There's a lot to be said for understanding the minutiae of the game, but even more to be said for understanding when some players just have "it". I'm not sure if it's something I can pick up on because I've picked a few stinkers in my time, but Kizer has always had a certain je ne sais quoi to him that is reminiscent of a lot of very good NFL QB's. It's something I thought I saw in his ND days and with each week I'm growing more and more convinced that he'll be the guy for us for a long time.
I don't think he'll ever be the guy who goes out there and completes 70% of his passes, throws zero picks and completely rips apart the defense pre snap a la Manning, but I think he'll be a guy who can go out there and extend plays, throw balls into seemingly impossible windows, and maybe have a few 400 yard passing games in his career when all is said and done.
"It"... the most elusive analysis of all. Easiest to spot if accompanied by fire, but not seeing fire as yet. Also sometimes accompanied by joy... not seeing it either. Still may be there, just absent anything to really celebrate as yet.
I do agree that Kizer showed something in 2015 at ND... and suspect that Kelly beat it out of him in 2016.
Also agree that he has the tools... question is whether the head finds that switch and flips it. If he does, I'm not sure what determines his ceiling from there. Another interesting conversation for another day...
"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 -
I admittedly lack your technical expertise, but I AM a lifelong Browns' Fan who has (& continues to) lived through the positives & negatives over the years. It seems to me that Kiser is a hard worker who addresses mistakes as he plays & improves as games go on. He also seems to "self diagnose". That said, he IS a rookie & will suffer growing pains. I just hope that our media & Fans (many of whom are very negative) can be patient. I look forward to continuing posts from both of you (and others) charting Kiser's progress.
I think the kid is a winner!
Expertise schmekspertise... all it really takes is time and some good HD replays that can be viewed over and over.
Totally agree on Kizer's self-awareness. I would not be surprised to learn that Hue's mentorship is as much to keep him from getting down on himself as anything else, but one of those anything elses is reading a D on the fly.... and that ain't easy.
I do too. There's a lot to be said for understanding the minutiae of the game, but even more to be said for understanding when some players just have "it". I'm not sure if it's something I can pick up on because I've picked a few stinkers in my time, but Kizer has always had a certain je ne sais quoi to him that is reminiscent of a lot of very good NFL QB's. It's something I thought I saw in his ND days and with each week I'm growing more and more convinced that he'll be the guy for us for a long time.
I don't think he'll ever be the guy who goes out there and completes 70% of his passes, throws zero picks and completely rips apart the defense pre snap a la Manning, but I think he'll be a guy who can go out there and extend plays, throw balls into seemingly impossible windows, and maybe have a few 400 yard passing games in his career when all is said and done.
"It"... the most elusive analysis of all. Easiest to spot if accompanied by fire, but not seeing fire as yet. Also sometimes accompanied by joy... not seeing it either. Still may be there, just absent anything to really celebrate as yet.
I do agree that Kizer showed something in 2015 at ND... and suspect that Kelly beat it out of him in 2016.
Also agree that he has the tools... question is whether the head finds that switch and flips it. If he does, I'm not sure what determines his ceiling from there. Another interesting conversation for another day...
"It"... the most elusive analysis of all. Easiest to spot if accompanied by fire, but not seeing fire as yet. Also sometimes accompanied by joy... not seeing it either. Still may be there, just absent anything to really celebrate as yet.
I do agree that Kizer showed something in 2015 at ND... and suspect that Kelly beat it out of him in 2016.
Also agree that he has the tools... question is whether the head finds that switch and flips it. If he does, I'm not sure what determines his ceiling from there. Another interesting conversation for another day...
What I like so far is more than any other of the rookie QB "stars" we've had over the last 20 years is that he makes plays that make me think wow...he's really good. He makes some head scratching decisions as well but that is to be expected for a rookie. But none of the high draft pick QB's we've picked over the last 20 years have done anything that made me think they have the ability. I think Kizer does and hopefully it all pans out.
-
Tour & TC,
I admittedly lack your technical expertise, but I AM a lifelong Browns' Fan who has (& continues to) lived through the positives & negatives over the years. It seems to me that Kiser is a hard worker who addresses mistakes as he plays & improves as games go on. He also seems to "self diagnose". That said, he IS a rookie & will suffer growing pains. I just hope that our media & Fans (many of whom are very negative) can be patient. I look forward to continuing posts from both of you (and others) charting Kiser's progress.
I think the kid is a winner!
Mike
I do too. There's a lot to be said for understanding the minutiae of the game, but even more to be said for understanding when some players just have "it". I'm not sure if it's something I can pick up on because I've picked a few stinkers in my time, but Kizer has always had a certain je ne sais quoi to him that is reminiscent of a lot of very good NFL QB's. It's something I thought I saw in his ND days and with each week I'm growing more and more convinced that he'll be the guy for us for a long time.
I don't think he'll ever be the guy who goes out there and completes 70% of his passes, throws zero picks and completely rips apart the defense pre snap a la Manning, but I think he'll be a guy who can go out there and extend plays, throw balls into seemingly impossible windows, and maybe have a few 400 yard passing games in his career when all is said and done.
I do too. There's a lot to be said for understanding the minutiae of the game, but even more to be said for understanding when some players just have "it". I'm not sure if it's something I can pick up on because I've picked a few stinkers in my time, but Kizer has always had a certain je ne sais quoi to him that is reminiscent of a lot of very good NFL QB's. It's something I thought I saw in his ND days and with each week I'm growing more and more convinced that he'll be the guy for us for a long time.
I don't think he'll ever be the guy who goes out there and completes 70% of his passes, throws zero picks and completely rips apart the defense pre snap a la Manning, but I think he'll be a guy who can go out there and extend plays, throw balls into seemingly impossible windows, and maybe have a few 400 yard passing games in his career when all is said and done.
He will be the proverbial gun slinger ala Favre 2.0, I don't know about anyone else but I'll take those INT's along with the WOW plays.
-
I do too. There's a lot to be said for understanding the minutiae of the game, but even more to be said for understanding when some players just have "it". I'm not sure if it's something I can pick up on because I've picked a few stinkers in my time, but Kizer has always had a certain je ne sais quoi to him that is reminiscent of a lot of very good NFL QB's. It's something I thought I saw in his ND days and with each week I'm growing more and more convinced that he'll be the guy for us for a long time.
I don't think he'll ever be the guy who goes out there and completes 70% of his passes, throws zero picks and completely rips apart the defense pre snap a la Manning, but I think he'll be a guy who can go out there and extend plays, throw balls into seemingly impossible windows, and maybe have a few 400 yard passing games in his career when all is said and done.
He will be the proverbial gun slinger ala Favre 2.0, I don't know about anyone else but I'll take those INT's along with the WOW plays.
He will be the proverbial gun slinger ala Favre 2.0, I don't know about anyone else but I'll take those INT's along with the WOW plays.
If our D plays as well in regular season as preseason, I'm all in with the rook while he learns. No one here thinks we are above a 5 win season so we got absolutely nothing to lose by just playing all the young guns both sides of the ball. Why not? It will certainly be entertaining.
-
I do too. There's a lot to be said for understanding the minutiae of the game, but even more to be said for understanding when some players just have "it". I'm not sure if it's something I can pick up on because I've picked a few stinkers in my time, but Kizer has always had a certain je ne sais quoi to him that is reminiscent of a lot of very good NFL QB's. It's something I thought I saw in his ND days and with each week I'm growing more and more convinced that he'll be the guy for us for a long time.
I don't think he'll ever be the guy who goes out there and completes 70% of his passes, throws zero picks and completely rips apart the defense pre snap a la Manning, but I think he'll be a guy who can go out there and extend plays, throw balls into seemingly impossible windows, and maybe have a few 400 yard passing games in his career when all is said and done.
He will be the proverbial gun slinger ala Favre 2.0, I don't know about anyone else but I'll take those INT's along with the WOW plays.
He will be the proverbial gun slinger ala Favre 2.0, I don't know about anyone else but I'll take those INT's along with the WOW plays.
I honestly could not handle that... and ultimately I do not think our Fanbase would either.
As I have said many times, Favre never won a SB, but he lost GB a couple of them.
Fortunately I do not see Favre in Kizer. For starters Kizer's work ethic is clear to see. Favre's was always a topic of debate.
"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 -
He will be the proverbial gun slinger ala Favre 2.0, I don't know about anyone else but I'll take those INT's along with the WOW plays.
I honestly could not handle that... and ultimately I do not think our Fanbase would either.
As I have said many times, Favre never won a SB, but he lost GB a couple of them.
Fortunately I do not see Favre in Kizer. For starters Kizer's work ethic is clear to see. Favre's was always a topic of debate.
Fortunately I do not see Favre in Kizer. For starters Kizer's work ethic is clear to see. Favre's was always a topic of debate
The thing I like most about both Kizer and Garrett is that they are both very smart players who are willing to both work and learn about how to be great players in the NFL. That's why I have no problem with letting them make their mistakes and learning from them every game as starters.
-
He will be the proverbial gun slinger ala Favre 2.0, I don't know about anyone else but I'll take those INT's along with the WOW plays.
I honestly could not handle that... and ultimately I do not think our Fanbase would either.
As I have said many times, Favre never won a SB, but he lost GB a couple of them.
Fortunately I do not see Favre in Kizer. For starters Kizer's work ethic is clear to see. Favre's was always a topic of debate.
I honestly could not handle that... and ultimately I do not think our Fanbase would either.
As I have said many times, Favre never won a SB, but he lost GB a couple of them.
Fortunately I do not see Favre in Kizer. For starters Kizer's work ethic is clear to see. Favre's was always a topic of debate.
What do you mean? Favre appeared in two Super Bowls. He won the 1996 SB vs. the Patriots and then lost the 1997 one to the Broncos and Elway.
If you are saying that he had little part in winning the SB the Packers did with him....I would disagree. He was 14/27 for 246 yards and 2 TDs -0- ints in that game. And he was actually better in the SB he lost: 25/42 256 yds. 3 TDs and 1 int.
Those are the only 2 SBs that he appeared in.
-
For starters Kizer's work ethic is clear to see. Favre's was always a topic of debate
I don't see how that can be said either. Favre had more consecutive games played than any player in history. That clearly shows a substantial work ethic. Maybe you criticize him for "reckless play" at times. But that has nothing to do with work ethic, at all. It may be indicative of an attempt to just do too much.
RankPlayerPosPeriodTeamsRegular seasonPlayoffsTotal
1Brett FavreQB9/27/1992 – 12/5/2010Green Bay; NY Jets; Minnesota297[11][12]243212
Jim MarshallDE9/17/1961 – 12/16/1979Minnesota270[13][14]192893
Mick TingelhoffC9/16/1962 – 12/17/1978Minnesota240[15][16]192594
Bruce MatthewsOL11/29/1987 – 1/6/2002Houston/Tennessee229[17][18]152445
Will ShieldsRG9/12/1993 – 12/31/2006Kansas City223[19][20]82316T
Alan PageDT10/8/1967 – 12/20/1981Minnesota; Chicago215[21][22]192346T
Ronde BarberDB11/21/1999 – 12/30/2012Tampa Bay215[23][24]92246T
London FletcherLB11/12/2000 – 12/29/2013St. Louis; Buffalo; Washington215[25][26]62219
Jim OttoC9/11/1960 – 12/14/1974Oakland210[27][28]1322310T
Derrick BrooksLB9/1/1996 – 12/28/2008Tampa Bay208[29][30]1121910T
Peyton ManningQB9/6/1998 – 1/2/2011Indianapolis208[31][32]1922712
Gene UpshawLG9/10/1967 – 10/4/1981Oakland207[33][34]2423113
Randall McDanielLG10/22/1989 – 1/6/2002Minnesota; Tampa Bay202[35][36]16218
-
I honestly could not handle that... and ultimately I do not think our Fanbase would either.
As I have said many times, Favre never won a SB, but he lost GB a couple of them.
Fortunately I do not see Favre in Kizer. For starters Kizer's work ethic is clear to see. Favre's was always a topic of debate.
What do you mean? Favre appeared in two Super Bowls. He won the 1996 SB vs. the Patriots and then lost the 1997 one to the Broncos and Elway.
If you are saying that he had little part in winning the SB the Packers did with him....I would disagree. He was 14/27 for 246 yards and 2 TDs -0- ints in that game. And he was actually better in the SB he lost: 25/42 256 yds. 3 TDs and 1 int.
Those are the only 2 SBs that he appeared in.
...I would disagree.
I'm shocked...
Favre behaved for one season, because Reggie White explained it to him. He took care of the ball. He "Dilfer'd" for a season. He did not have the self-discipline to do it again.
In the SB where he was the winning QB his rating was 107.9... largely due to zero turnovers and a 9+ YPA. In the loss where per you he played "better", his rating was 91.0... he had two turnovers and a YPA of just over 6. One of the primary reasons the ratings are as close as they are is that in the win he took five sacks and in the loss only one. But taking sacks was preferable to going "Favre".
"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 -
For starters Kizer's work ethic is clear to see. Favre's was always a topic of debate
I don't see how that can be said either. Favre had more consecutive games played than any player in history. That clearly shows a substantial work ethic. Maybe you criticize him for "reckless play" at times. But that has nothing to do with work ethic, at all. It may be indicative of an attempt to just do too much.
RankPlayerPosPeriodTeamsRegular seasonPlayoffsTotal
1Brett FavreQB9/27/1992 – 12/5/2010Green Bay; NY Jets; Minnesota297[11][12]243212
Jim MarshallDE9/17/1961 – 12/16/1979Minnesota270[13][14]192893
Mick TingelhoffC9/16/1962 – 12/17/1978Minnesota240[15][16]192594
Bruce MatthewsOL11/29/1987 – 1/6/2002Houston/Tennessee229[17][18]152445
Will ShieldsRG9/12/1993 – 12/31/2006Kansas City223[19][20]82316T
Alan PageDT10/8/1967 – 12/20/1981Minnesota; Chicago215[21][22]192346T
Ronde BarberDB11/21/1999 – 12/30/2012Tampa Bay215[23][24]92246T
London FletcherLB11/12/2000 – 12/29/2013St. Louis; Buffalo; Washington215[25][26]62219
Jim OttoC9/11/1960 – 12/14/1974Oakland210[27][28]1322310T
Derrick BrooksLB9/1/1996 – 12/28/2008Tampa Bay208[29][30]1121910T
Peyton ManningQB9/6/1998 – 1/2/2011Indianapolis208[31][32]1922712
Gene UpshawLG9/10/1967 – 10/4/1981Oakland207[33][34]2423113
Randall McDanielLG10/22/1989 – 1/6/2002Minnesota; Tampa Bay202[35][36]16218
I don't see how that can be said either. Favre had more consecutive games played than any player in history. That clearly shows a substantial work ethic. Maybe you criticize him for "reckless play" at times. But that has nothing to do with work ethic, at all. It may be indicative of an attempt to just do too much.
His streak is primarily what folks point in support of their argument that he had a strong work ethic.
It's a remarkable achievement, but I'll join others who say that showing up on a bunch of Sundays in a row is far less of an indicator of work ethic than what a QB does the other six days of the week.
"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 -
...I would disagree.
I'm shocked...
Favre behaved for one season, because Reggie White explained it to him. He took care of the ball. He "Dilfer'd" for a season. He did not have the self-discipline to do it again.
In the SB where he was the winning QB his rating was 107.9... largely due to zero turnovers and a 9+ YPA. In the loss where per you he played "better", his rating was 91.0... he had two turnovers and a YPA of just over 6. One of the primary reasons the ratings are as close as they are is that in the win he took five sacks and in the loss only one. But taking sacks was preferable to going "Favre".
I'm shocked...
Favre behaved for one season, because Reggie White explained it to him. He took care of the ball. He "Dilfer'd" for a season. He did not have the self-discipline to do it again.
In the SB where he was the winning QB his rating was 107.9... largely due to zero turnovers and a 9+ YPA. In the loss where per you he played "better", his rating was 91.0... he had two turnovers and a YPA of just over 6. One of the primary reasons the ratings are as close as they are is that in the win he took five sacks and in the loss only one. But taking sacks was preferable to going "Favre".
So, what? In your estimation like Matt Flynn or the like would have been just as good as Favre in leading that team to two consecutive Super Bowls?
Was Favre undisciplined? Sure. But what do you want out of a QB: A guy with superior talent and Chutzpah....or a leader. You would have preferred like Cody Kessler...a Captain Checkdown.
The Super Bowl that he lost in which he threw 3 TDs....and you think he had a bad performance. Maybe he lost because John Elway was just better that day.
-
I don't see how that can be said either. Favre had more consecutive games played than any player in history. That clearly shows a substantial work ethic. Maybe you criticize him for "reckless play" at times. But that has nothing to do with work ethic, at all. It may be indicative of an attempt to just do too much.
His streak is primarily what folks point in support of their argument that he had a strong work ethic.
It's a remarkable achievement, but I'll join others who say that showing up on a bunch of Sundays in a row is far less of an indicator of work ethic than what a QB does the other six days of the week.
His streak is primarily what folks point in support of their argument that he had a strong work ethic.
It's a remarkable achievement, but I'll join others who say that showing up on a bunch of Sundays in a row is far less of an indicator of work ethic than what a QB does the other six days of the week.
Well....isn't "achievement" the goal? How is this for achievement: Most wins by an NFL starting QB in a career: Tom Brady 208, Peyton Manning 200, Brett Favre 199. John Elway 162, Dan Marino 155. You say he also had more losses than anyone else? That is true. Sometimes the rest of the team you are on has something to do with wins and losses.
Would I have liked to have had him playing for the Browns for like a 10 year period? Better ass believe it.
-
I'm shocked...
Favre behaved for one season, because Reggie White explained it to him. He took care of the ball. He "Dilfer'd" for a season. He did not have the self-discipline to do it again.
In the SB where he was the winning QB his rating was 107.9... largely due to zero turnovers and a 9+ YPA. In the loss where per you he played "better", his rating was 91.0... he had two turnovers and a YPA of just over 6. One of the primary reasons the ratings are as close as they are is that in the win he took five sacks and in the loss only one. But taking sacks was preferable to going "Favre".
So, what? In your estimation like Matt Flynn or the like would have been just as good as Favre in leading that team to two consecutive Super Bowls?
Was Favre undisciplined? Sure. But what do you want out of a QB: A guy with superior talent and Chutzpah....or a leader. You would have preferred like Cody Kessler...a Captain Checkdown.
The Super Bowl that he lost in which he threw 3 TDs....and you think he had a bad performance. Maybe he lost because John Elway was just better that day.
Maybe he lost because John Elway was just better that day.
Would that be the Elway that threw for 123 yards?
But you keep on generating strawmen...
"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 -
His streak is primarily what folks point in support of their argument that he had a strong work ethic.
It's a remarkable achievement, but I'll join others who say that showing up on a bunch of Sundays in a row is far less of an indicator of work ethic than what a QB does the other six days of the week.
Well....isn't "achievement" the goal? How is this for achievement: Most wins by an NFL starting QB in a career: Tom Brady 208, Peyton Manning 200, Brett Favre 199. John Elway 162, Dan Marino 155. You say he also had more losses than anyone else? That is true. Sometimes the rest of the team you are on has something to do with wins and losses.
Would I have liked to have had him playing for the Browns for like a 10 year period? Better ass believe it.
Would I have liked to have had him playing for the Browns for like a 10 year period? Better ass believe it.
I don't... I've seen you post.
-
Maybe he lost because John Elway was just better that day.
Would that be the Elway that threw for 123 yards?
But you keep on generating strawmen...
-
Sure, Gip.... Care to put that in a poll?
"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 -
Would I have liked to have had him playing for the Browns for like a 10 year period? Better ass believe it.
I don't... I've seen you post.
Again, I don't know if you are continuing to have issues expressing yourself: You are saying that you would NOT have liked to have had Favre play for the Browns? Is that because you have had so much love and confidence in the 27 starting QBs we have had here since 1999? Or do you just have some irrational hatred for Favre? I mean, yes, I know that he gave a very wooden performance in "Something About Mary"....or is it that were jealous that he got to date Cameron Diaz in that movie...or some such thing?
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