situation, i.e., down and distance...

9) straight vs. PAP...

And there are probably others, but given that averages are used, a lot of the variables should wash out.

The ones that don't? IMO your numbers 4 and 1. How decisive is the QB and how quick is he once he decides.

@the-gipper said:

It's definitely a legit stats that teams monitor....release time is critical to success.....

It is measured from snap to release....pretty basic....

The "why" is really more important though.....just a slow release shouldnt be enough to condemn a QB.....

Lots of reasons a QB might have a slow release time.....take your pick...

1) he has a slow release....(duh)......(blame = QB)

2) he doesnt have good(ie: open) receivers......(blame = WR's).....(and coaching)

3) he could have a slow developing offense.....(blame = coaching)

4) poor field vision or not knowing where to go....(blame = QB)

5) deep drop vs shorty drop vs shotgun.....(blame = coaching)(and QB)

6) play calling.....not adjusting to the QB's needs......(blame = coaching)

So....our QB's hold the ball(which we've all known).....I say its a combination of "all the above" and not 1 thing that can be quickly fixed......

@choco said:

The statement was made that the Browns QBs are in the bottom of "release times".

I asked several questions: A. Who compiles this data,..and where do you find it? i.e. what "list" exists for them to be on the bottom of.

B. How is such a thing measured? As I said...from snap, from commencement of their throwing motion...what?

See...it all sounds a bit bogus to me.

@choco said:

Again....the bottom of WHAT? Provide a link to this "ranking".

@the-gipper said:

What do you mean by "the bottom"? The bottom of what? And where do you even find information like that?

@tour2ma said:

How do they measure "release time"? Seconds that go by from the snap till the ball is released? Or "windup" time? How long it takes a QB to go through the motion of releasing a pass? On the latter I wonder how long that would have been for a Dan Marino pass to take....vs. say a Tim Tebow pass (who had an extraordinarily long windup if I recall).

Seems that other factors would go into it if it were the former: line protection, ability of the receivers to get open, tendency of the QB to "scramble".

@baconhound said:

Certainly is a macro metric, but the world needs those, too... I just read somewhere (maybe Pluto's column) that our QB trio of Kess, McC and RG were all in the bottom eight for the league for average release time.

As different as these three were from each other it certainly suggests to me a systemic problem or problems.

@topdawg31 said:

What do you mean by "the bottom"? The bottom of what? And where do you even find information like that?

@topdawg31 said:

I'm not sure how PD does their measurement but there can be many variables that could affect the time. Unless you are measuring times on completed passes, for specific yardages, on specific routes, to specific receivers I don't see much merit in a general time.

@clevfan4life said:

all of our QB's were in the bottom for timed releases according to today PD so it's definitely not our imagination that they hold the ball too damn long.

@tour2ma said:

... and then some asshole DC went and invented the "twist"... and it was off to the races.

.

?????????

@clevfan4life said:

... and then some asshole DC went and invented the "twist"... and it was off to the races.

@flugel said:

Before PFF came along to praise Mitchell Schwartz's play at RT and increase people's awareness of his overall talent - there were times significant portions of our fan base in cyberspace used to hurry to blame him for pass pro blunders. They did so without looking at how long it was talking a guy like Weeden or McCoy to get rid of the ball while he had the task of blocking Carlos Dunlap one on one outside.

Early in his career Mitch had ample turnstile moments in PassPro, but as his tech developed... ultimately ending up to where he was close to a mirror image of Joe... his grades improved.

Add that in run blocking we moved from primarily ZBS, in which Mitch struggled, to power schemes, in which he was at least "average", and the foundation for his "rise" was complete.

@clevfan4life said:

While true, if the game hasn't slowed down for an inexperienced QB dealing with the complexities of defensive alignments/schemes - the length of time to protect the QB can get unreasonable. In quite a few highlights I've seen, a lot of TD passes are thrown about a tenth of a second before the QB gets hit.

Before PFF came along to praise Mitchell Schwartz's play at RT and increase people's awareness of his overall talent - there were times significant portions of our fan base in cyberspace used to hurry to blame him for pass pro blunders. They did so without looking at how long it was talking a guy like Weeden or McCoy to get rid of the ball while he had the task of blocking Carlos Dunlap one on one outside.

Last year, especially in the Miami game - Pazstor had to block Cameron Wake while we had a rookie QB counting on 2 first year starters at WR (Pryor & Louis) to make all the right reads and adjustments to defensive schemes/leverages. In that game, our RT gave up a sack to Wake and had some costly penalties when some of those plays our rookie QB had enough time to get rid of the ball. But, only Paz got received 100% credit for the sack/penalties...

@ghoolie said:

Mud, I am of the conviction that not getting the ball out and having WR that don't only not get open, but that don't threaten a D, brings extra pressure on an OL. I believe it allows the D not to bite on play fakes and camp out a bit closer to the LOS, and more importantly, react and commit quicker to activity near the LOS.

Now, to the onlooker, for sure missed blocks indicate lousy OL play. But I don't at all, not for one minute buy into the explanation that it has to do with the talent of the lineman. Football is a game of centimeters, of not split second reactions, but split fraction of a second reactions. People tend to analyze football strictly by analytical means. I understand this because it allows us something to grab on to, a way to feel like we can manage talent and the game.

However, human behavior and performance cannot be predicted by analytical data. Yes, a guy who runs a 4.4 second 40 is much more likely to make the NFL than a guy who runs it in 7 seconds. But at the pro level? 4.4 versus 4.3? Unless they award points for racing, analytics is meaningless.

It is no secret that men can do amazing things. When driven by emotion, the chemicals of adrenaline and endorphin boost physical performance far, far above what someone does in an analytical trial. How else can you explain cement footed Bernie Kosar shredding defenses to look like swiss cheese?

Sorry, man, but it just defies logic that the physical abilities between OL men are so vast that the analytics can pick the better ones.

You noted our QBs hold the ball too long and our WR threaten nobody, Let me ask you, do you not admit that our OL would also know that? Put yourself in the shoes of a Browns OL. How energized are you going to be knowing in the back of your mind that even if you give the QB 4 seconds, he is probably going to get pasted any way?

Now, many here will say, "bullshit, they get paid millions to do their job". But that doesn't hold any water. Money has absolutely no effect on this. If it did, money surely would keep Josh from his toke troubles. It surely would keep players out of trouble.

Physical talent in the NFL is abundant. Like cherries on a tree. What makes one player different from another are the human elements. Bill Belichik turns more men into players not because of analytics, but because of the human elements.

Every year is full of expectations and surprises. This year will, to me, have one added enjoyment. Once and for all it will settle the argument I fuel; Is it the OL or is it the QB. Sure, they both have to contribute. However, my feeling is the total lack of skill at QB, WR, TE and to a lesser extent RB ( I really like Crowell) is going to deliver the same dump and dink offense, and the same slaughterhouse for our QBs that we saw last year.

Can Kizer change that? I don't believe so. However, for sure Kessler, Ass-oiler and the rest cannot. If we want to win, the dice need to be rolled on Kizer. If it turns out he is dynamic, exciting and explosive, and I hope he is, the OL will have a hero, something to be excited about. But dude, an OL-man is human. Who the hell is going to block with emotion when you have Kessler throwing the ball? Did he even make one single. WOW HOLY SHIT play? Nobody is going to black for 16 games with a guy like that running the show, and 8 men in the box all year long.

Well said. Kind of a neat juxtaposition to OL play and QB play. I would say that roughly 80% of a football team's job is to maul people. ie the entire defense and the OL and everyone else on the offense who isn't handling a ball during a play.

Mauling people, that takes physicality, fire, and attitude. The more fired up the better.

But to be a successful QB you gotta be calmer than that. It does you no good to go out there with your amp turned to 11.

So the chemistry, between the two groups on different emotional planes, that's the key.

@ghoolie said:

I've said that Kizer came to a good place 'for him'. The path to the starting QB job is not blocked by an entrenched starter. It's an up for grabs job.

Looking at the 2015 College QB ratings, Kizer was #12 while Kessler was #44.

Here's a link to the game stats when they played against each other:

http://www.espn.com/college-football/game?gameId=400757053

@tour2ma said:

For my part I take it as it is... a list of flawed projections, but one in which I'm much happier being near the top than the bottom.

Maybe this just my jaded/cynical fuck showing.....but it "seems" as if theres a distinct inverse relationship between pff and our actual o line play. Like the better they say we are the worse it "seems" on sundays. Hence my constant agitation with pff. Ill watch our qb limp off the field holding his ribs and sure enough by wed im seeing posts here quoting the new pff rankings that have 5 sure fire first ballot lineman on the field for us

@choco said:

Same with proclamations of ineptitude

Agreed

@mudfly said:

I think you may be correct about our high, 2016 ranking... pre-season. Then Bito went down and Erving never showed. By season's end we were #15-ish, IIRC.

All PFF can do is to add their evals of individual OL starters. The true sum of the parts may vary (ever heard that before?), but there's no better way to project an OL's performance, especially when one or more of its parts have changed.

For my part I take it as it is... a list of flawed projections, but one in which I'm much happier being near the top than the bottom.

@mudfly said:

Mud, I am of the conviction that not getting the ball out and having WR that don't only not get open, but that don't threaten a D, brings extra pressure on an OL. I believe it allows the D not to bite on play fakes and camp out a bit closer to the LOS, and more importantly, react and commit quicker to activity near the LOS.

Now, to the onlooker, for sure missed blocks indicate lousy OL play. But I don't at all, not for one minute buy into the explanation that it has to do with the talent of the lineman. Football is a game of centimeters, of not split second reactions, but split fraction of a second reactions. People tend to analyze football strictly by analytical means. I understand this because it allows us something to grab on to, a way to feel like we can manage talent and the game.

However, human behavior and performance cannot be predicted by analytical data. Yes, a guy who runs a 4.4 second 40 is much more likely to make the NFL than a guy who runs it in 7 seconds. But at the pro level? 4.4 versus 4.3? Unless they award points for racing, analytics is meaningless.

It is no secret that men can do amazing things. When driven by emotion, the chemicals of adrenaline and endorphin boost physical performance far, far above what someone does in an analytical trial. How else can you explain cement footed Bernie Kosar shredding defenses to look like swiss cheese?

Sorry, man, but it just defies logic that the physical abilities between OL men are so vast that the analytics can pick the better ones.

You noted our QBs hold the ball too long and our WR threaten nobody, Let me ask you, do you not admit that our OL would also know that? Put yourself in the shoes of a Browns OL. How energized are you going to be knowing in the back of your mind that even if you give the QB 4 seconds, he is probably going to get pasted any way?

Now, many here will say, "bullshit, they get paid millions to do their job". But that doesn't hold any water. Money has absolutely no effect on this. If it did, money surely would keep Josh from his toke troubles. It surely would keep players out of trouble.

Physical talent in the NFL is abundant. Like cherries on a tree. What makes one player different from another are the human elements. Bill Belichik turns more men into players not because of analytics, but because of the human elements.

Every year is full of expectations and surprises. This year will, to me, have one added enjoyment. Once and for all it will settle the argument I fuel; Is it the OL or is it the QB. Sure, they both have to contribute. However, my feeling is the total lack of skill at QB, WR, TE and to a lesser extent RB ( I really like Crowell) is going to deliver the same dump and dink offense, and the same slaughterhouse for our QBs that we saw last year.

Can Kizer change that? I don't believe so. However, for sure Kessler, Ass-oiler and the rest cannot. If we want to win, the dice need to be rolled on Kizer. If it turns out he is dynamic, exciting and explosive, and I hope he is, the OL will have a hero, something to be excited about. But dude, an OL-man is human. Who the hell is going to block with emotion when you have Kessler throwing the ball? Did he even make one single. WOW HOLY SHIT play? Nobody is going to black for 16 games with a guy like that running the show, and 8 men in the box all year long.