Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Shally's avatar

The upside comparison that is obvious is Steve Young. Not sure how old he was by the time he got to SF but Walsh obviously saw huge potential despite his failure in Tampa and his time in USFL

He developed a HOF resume under Walsh. So it does happen

More likely Mariota is simply a bridge to get you from TH to a long term starter.

Maybe he has better tools but isn’t even as good in terms of W-L? Either way you have little to lose signing him because he won’t cost much, won’t prevent you from drafting a qb,

Cannot realistically demand a long term deal, won’t necessarily prevent TH from beating him out as starter, and best case scenario (like Foles) won’t prevent you from turning the offense over to a draft Qb in year 2 if the younger guy is ready to take over

The obvious negative is it most likely results in another .500 level team even with a good draft and free agency period

The obvious point is that this kind of move should have been made in year 1 of RRs tenure here, not year 3. And looking up at Dallas and Philly in the standings won’t be fun. If the Giants are much improved the seat under RR could get white hot even with the optimism that a draft Qb will bring

This doesn’t even count the dysfunction that will happen if RR leaves or is replaced after another poor year leaving a draft Qb behind him

All the more why RR is going to swing for the fences this year and Mariota isn’t That Guy

Expand full comment
guest's avatar

I really enjoy your articles and the work put into them...and the learning from looking at clips. But I really don't think you can analyze QBs (maybe even players in general) with this sort of clip-based article. Every player will have a mix of good and bad plays. To analyze their performance, some statistical argument (QBR, RTG, PFF, your own) is needed.

I mean...sure MM was pinpoint on that clip you showed. But every QB is sometimes pinpoint. And sometimes not pinpoint. What matters is the % pinpointiness. (Same applies with other traits, good and bad.)

I actually think these clip type articles are better for explaining schemes and concepts. Here's what's different between Gruden and Shanahan, for instance. Even there, there's issues of percentages. But at least we learn some concepts, get some analysis of the line movement and the like, that TV analysts and sportstalkbloviators like Chris Russell ignore.

Oh...and REDSKINS!

Expand full comment
11 more comments...

No posts