Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 373 of 388 FirstFirst ... 273323363371372373374375383 ... LastLast
Results 5,581 to 5,595 of 5806
  1. #5581
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Raider Nation
    Posts
    15,272
    Quote Originally Posted by FarOutIos View Post
    Looking back in this thread, the question was posed on what kind of slow start would warrant pulling Carr and starting mariota. I think 1-3 or 2-5 was the question.

    Seeing how the schedule plays out, I think the bye week is the point you look at. IF we start 1-4 I think carr gets benched and mariota starts after the bye. 2-3 and Carr is the starter after the bye.
    You can't base it on the win loss record. It has to be based purely on his performance. Say, he throws for 300+ yards a game, 3 TDs 0-1 Int, no mistakes, but we are just outplayed, maybe defense or kicking game loses it and we lose 3 out of 4. You don't pull him.

    Let's just see what this team can do.

    "...prone to stoogery.".

  2. #5582
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    7,032
    Quote Originally Posted by Wolfe-Raider View Post
    You can't base it on the win loss record. It has to be based purely on his performance. Say, he throws for 300+ yards a game, 3 TDs 0-1 Int, no mistakes, but we are just outplayed, maybe defense or kicking game loses it and we lose 3 out of 4. You don't pull him.

    Let's just see what this team can do.
    You canít solely base it on record.... but more than likely, if we start 1-4, then carr probably didnít throw fit 300 yards and 3tds in those games. Maybe a few 300 yard 1 TD games.

    And I think unless his numbers were great in that span, heíd probably get the hook. QBs get the blame more often than not...

  3. #5583
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,105
    Quote Originally Posted by FarOutIos View Post
    You canít solely base it on record.... but more than likely, if we start 1-4, then carr probably didnít throw fit 300 yards and 3tds in those games. Maybe a few 300 yard 1 TD games.

    And I think unless his numbers were great in that span, heíd probably get the hook. QBs get the blame more often than not...
    I think the total points and point differential can be sometimes more indicative -- and why Vegas odds makers use this -- of the team performance, and to an extent, offensive/defensive production. If the Raiders are 1-4 but either scoring 27pts/game or 13pts/game is quite different. If the latter is true then you probably will start seeing MM sooner. Of course you have to take in to context what is going on and luckily (unfortunately?) Gruden is not taking advice from us NFL experts on PSD.

  4. #5584
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Top of the world
    Posts
    7,618
    Quote Originally Posted by bulldog2683 View Post
    I think the total points and point differential can be sometimes more indicative -- and why Vegas odds makers use this -- of the team performance, and to an extent, offensive/defensive production. If the Raiders are 1-4 but either scoring 27pts/game or 13pts/game is quite different. If the latter is true then you probably will start seeing MM sooner. Of course you have to take in to context what is going on and luckily (unfortunately?) Gruden is not taking advice from us NFL experts on PSD.
    Grudens in a safe seat he should be taking a longer curve view of performance. Earliest indicators of future success will be within the competency levels performed across the game plan and schemes evolution. Year 3 we should be seeing deep scheme uses and complex game plans with multiple variations week to week. He has the tools now to do it. Its up to the players now to grow. It certainly isn't all on the QB and as Gruden has kept saying we need other players on the same level of knowledge across the O. Its laughable how simplistically some people view the game. Its chess not checkers

  5. #5585
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    3,347
    Even more laughable are those who have difficulties differentiating good QB play, from bad QB play. It's not rocket science.

  6. #5586
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    159
    Quote Originally Posted by dbacknick View Post
    How do you pull a QB, then start him next game, especially if the BU wins the game?
    Well first of all you're assuming the backup wins the game. Odds are they won't. If MM were able to consistently deliver good performances as a starter, he would still be with the Titans.

    Second of all you're assuming that if the backup plays well in a mostly lost cause with no expectations, that he's going to play as loose and free as a starter over the long haul. Most of the time that isn't the case.

    Look, neither of our guys is a franchise guy. Both have shown they can have good starting performances, mixed with pretty mediocre ones. If you're going to pull each one after every less than stellar performance, it's going to be a season of rotating QBs every 2-3 games, which isn't likely to yield great results from either one. At some point you gotta go with whoever is likely to give you the better performances over the bulk of the games.

  7. #5587
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    7,032
    Haha. So many experts.

    But if any of you think that we can start 1-4 and Carr will be starting after the break, I strongly disagree. And donít give me your breakdown of analysis. That all makes sense from a statistical viewpoint. But thatís not how this normally works.

    Unless there are some extreme conditions- where everything else fails and Carr is playing amazing. Heíd likely be benched at 1-4. Thatís why mariota is here.

  8. #5588
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    5,033
    Quote Originally Posted by mmbt View Post
    Well first of all you're assuming the backup wins the game. Odds are they won't. If MM were able to consistently deliver good performances as a starter, he would still be with the Titans.

    Second of all you're assuming that if the backup plays well in a mostly lost cause with no expectations, that he's going to play as loose and free as a starter over the long haul. Most of the time that isn't the case.

    Look, neither of our guys is a franchise guy. Both have shown they can have good starting performances, mixed with pretty mediocre ones. If you're going to pull each one after every less than stellar performance, it's going to be a season of rotating QBs every 2-3 games, which isn't likely to yield great results from either one. At some point you gotta go with whoever is likely to give you the better performances over the bulk of the games.
    There's a saying if you have more than one QB, then you have no QB. Tell me of one situation where rotating QB's was successful? I don't think it's ever been done. Can't see Gruden doing this, but I'll tell you if he does pull Carr, you might not see him back in there. I know George Blanda came in late quite a bit when Lamonica played badly. Blanda had success, and the only reason he didn't start the next game was because he was the kicker, and he was pretty old.

  9. #5589
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    331
    Quote Originally Posted by dbacknick View Post
    There's a saying if you have more than one QB, then you have no QB. Tell me of one situation where rotating QB's was successful? I don't think it's ever been done. Can't see Gruden doing this, but I'll tell you if he does pull Carr, you might not see him back in there. I know George Blanda came in late quite a bit when Lamonica played badly. Blanda had success, and the only reason he didn't start the next game was because he was the kicker, and he was pretty old.
    Wisenhunt did it in Arizona when he rotated Skelton and Lindley on a series by series basis after Kurt Warner got injured. Results were poor, obviously.
    Last edited by mberr; 05-08-2020 at 03:52 PM.

  10. #5590
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    5,033
    Quote Originally Posted by mberr View Post
    Wisenhunt did it in Arizona when he rotated Skelton and Lindley on a series by series basis after Kurt Warner got injured. Results were poor, obviously.
    I could see doing it for gadget plays, but you lose the continuity. I'm sure the QB's don't like it either. Hey, I hope I do n't see MM at all. And I mean that in a good way.

  11. #5591
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    331
    Quote Originally Posted by dbacknick View Post
    I could see doing it for gadget plays, but you lose the continuity. I'm sure the QB's don't like it either. Hey, I hope I do n't see MM at all. And I mean that in a good way.
    agreed

  12. #5592
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Indianapolis, Indiana
    Posts
    3,862
    Barring an injury to 4

    We wonít see MM more than end game

  13. #5593
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    The Bay
    Posts
    15,616
    Quote Originally Posted by Indy Raider View Post
    Barring an injury to 4

    We wonít see MM more than end game
    I disagree I think we see him come in and run some options sporadically throughout games. Maybe not early to start cause of what theyíve said about getting him healthy and building him up but I expect to see a few things sprinkled in there for him.

  14. #5594
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,164
    Quote Originally Posted by TrueFan420 View Post
    I disagree I think we see him come in and run some options sporadically throughout games. Maybe not early to start cause of what theyíve said about getting him healthy and building him up but I expect to see a few things sprinkled in there for him.
    Definitely some goal line stuff if that doesnít improve dramatically. Carr did a lot of good things between the 20s at times last year. Maybe if we had Mariota in our goal line package we may have won a couple extra games this year, who knows?

  15. #5595
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    6,698
    I have never been a fan of bringing QBís for situational plays. I think it disrupts rhythm and temp to much.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •