Incredible D performance. I was keeping out of the GDT, but in the chat for some play by play flavor (and my thanks to those who helped drag my awareness along.) But also I want to share some out-of-market awareness on behalf of those of us struggling to actually see the coverage:
26-3 is a W. Some might even call it an impressive win. Skip this post if the character of this thread is as positive as Ash's opening post. If not...
You learn something being consigned to NFLN & Red Zone, and consigning yourself to the gameday chat (and sometimes thread, though it was the chat yesterday)
1 - We as viewers are stupidly offense-oriented in the moment. People will yell (or all caps type) the name of a guy sacking the QB, but most of the chat was STILL consumed with Mac-Zappe comparison stuff. spoiler alert, I'm as bad as anybody and I did a ton of it below. I am sorry, because that makes me part of the problem.
I'm not sure how much of our time was spent yesterday on the rapidly accumalating sack total. Nobody screamed that Coach X was brilliant, perhaps with an equivalently glowing nickname to the negative "Fat Matt," you know, because being fat makes it impossible to be a coach. Jesus, why is fat okay if you just have a Willfred Brimley mustache, but not with a Gimli mustache and beard? But I digress.
2 - The stupid offense fixation, and specifically QB-fixation, is incredibly evident after a game like the Indy game. I had no idea it was historically brilliant until reading/seeing post-game stuff.
3 - I had to laugh, remembering that when we DID have Brady, the same guys that think they're brilliant for crowing about how they wished we were whatever we weren't often complained that we never sacked anybody. We'd be winning by multiple touchdowns and they'd be whining that we need bookend rushers with spin moves like Indy had, because Brady was sacked 3 times and Manning had a clean jersey.
4 - this made me remember what & where we are now in terms of the much heralded "identity." in order...
a- The defense/ST
b - The run game - an incredible, rechargeable bargain proposition
c - passing offense
And that only changes when you land or develop someone great at the
most important position on the offense.
We are not
trying to win by winning one position. That's just how we won for 20 years or so. You do need a good enough QB, but not an elite QB. Then you call him elite if you win. A Roethlisberger but less rapey.
We want someone at that position that can grow into a good QB. We would be so happy to recreate Brady, but the team is run by realists, not BBS fans. We WANT a good young player with the capacity to go on to Bradyesque stature, but if we actually get a top 1/3 of the league guy, usually the move is to shrug and say "can't have everything. Where would you put it?"
If you barely remember what a SB feels like, you build the parts and then you buy the last 3 brilliant years at the end of a brilliant career, like Tampa did, and like Denver did with Manning (although Denver more carried Manning to the finish line) i.e., you bet on the "sure thing." If you are building from the bottom up at that
most expensive position on the field, you draft a QB.
The signs of the re-build were there from post-Brady day 1. Zig vs. Zag, try to build the last dynasty over again vs. try to build the next dynasty. We chose not to trade a whole draft to get some guy that's billed as doing it all himself. We got best value with our best draft pick in years.
This game reminded me that "the most important position on the field" on a 53-man team can still be one position responsible for a 20% contribution. That usually
is the contribution, outside the very best... Brady, Peyton in his prime, Rodgers. For a Brady-led team, that 20% is too low a mark... but bear in mind that in a BB-led team, a Brady-led team can always win, and a Brady knows that and uses it.
5 - Ergo, oh my GAWD I could go for people discussing the team in terms of the whole team, and the whole operation, not fixation on a question like "Mac or Zappe," especially when that's asked and answered, until and unless the answer changes.
Here's the lay of the land:
A - we're developing a QB. THat's Mac Jones. He's in a sophomore slump. We are lucky that we have another guy who's an okay prospect unless the guys on the opposing defense get their hands up.
B - whoever is in at RB will succeed, and will do so as part of a committee, unless (C) derails that model. Don't expect us to turn up our own King Henry. Do expect us to go from Harris to Stevenson to [next] regularly.
C - O-line (particularly if banged up) can sink or enhance both. I do hope we go heavy on O-line going forward and clone Dante Scarnecchia (sp?). Send someone right now to collect his DNA from a beer can in a "friendly" visit. Whatever it takes. Unless he straight up died or something. Scar didn't die right?
D - In 2021, we spent cap $ while the spending was good (the historic one-year cap deflation, especially relative to future years in offseason of '21). We just bought stuff on-sale. Doesn't mean you'll get great stuff, but it helps. At TE, we bought two shots to get 1 great performance. We complained that both didn't hit., although we did once at TE by spending twice. We spent on weapons at WR and ultimately we're not getting the hoped-for output. With Mac and Zappe, whining about the need for a "true number one" is irrelevant right now. Don't try to buy your way to success when your guy isn't the guy you want... yet.
About time
In large part, watching Brady last night and to an extent watching Zappe (crappe, now
I'm doing it,) reminded me again how much more quickly you have to
successfully read and react than Mac as of 2022. That's mental. He had the tools last year. This O-line can get him 3 or 3 1/2 seconds on a good day. For a Brady (after 22 years of football,) that's an eternity... he is a 2 1/2 second guy. Give him 3 1/2 and something bad will happen to you. For Mac, with tons of pressure on him especially on the turnover front... that's not enough time for the right decision, not reliably. But to succeed at this level, that's what you get... 3-3.5... (the below is 11 years old, so if someone can flesh this out with more recent numbers, that is welcomed. The info on Mac in 2021 makes mentions that 2.6 seconds, their number for Jones, was 10th in the league.)
Every quarterback has their own clock, but the mean sack time tends to stay roughly the same.
www.footballoutsiders.com
Mac 2021 article, mentioning a 2.6 second release time in 21
The early success of New England Patriots quarterback Mac Jones says a lot about the NFL and how quarterbacks are evaluated.
sportsnaut.com
I'll add that winning the turnover battle is not optional, so screw Mac if he never gets his game back with the demand that he protect the ball. I've said elsewhere I can live with an int. per game on average, but you need a couple TDs a game to counterbalance.
side-track: I was amazed at some of the coverage sacks last night in the Chiefs-Titans game (so was one of the announcers.... I think it's Chris Collinsworth. He might have been using hyperbole, but he said that the QB had 10 seconds to throw... and still got sacked. Thing was, the Titans were playing some kid who makes both Mac and Zappe look like hall of famers (or the Chiefs D made him look like that. I'm going with the former).
So the main thing I realized was my need to channel Frankie go to Hollywood via Aaron Rodgers, R-E-L-A-X. Whichever we go with, we might do great. It can take a long time for a QB to make a short time feel like a long time, and none of our guys is there right now (Zappe's closer at the moment, but Mac '21 is better than anybody we have in '21. I look forward to seeing that guy again... and then better yet, that guy plus improvement.)
Is "the problem" that there aren't enough weapons? Okay, who's going to throw to them?
Is it the QB? Okay, you have a rook and a second year guy in a slump. You want to hire a D.I. to scream "BE MORE EXPERIENCED" in their faces? Maybe swap em in and out every game and see who's more psychologically strong? Yes, that's what this team has needed. Sure.
Or maybe it's to realize you don't get a spoiled entitled dream team every season. You get challenges and you get brilliance and sometimes you get the brilliance on D. Do you chase every shiny object at receiver? Maybe when you have a top-5 QB. Then the bang for the cap buck is there. When you've got guy who has responded to improved weapons with declining performance, maybe that's not your best value proposition.
Do you complain that there's no named OC, that you've lost your O-line coach, whatever else has happened on the coaching side? Or maybe this team hates its coach? Maybe, I guess if you want to complain. Buy the team then.
But I have to go back and read
this thread now. I saw the OP was positive, as it should be. with 26 pages here, I guess it is possible that 90% of them are appreciative "Wow, does this organization find different ways to excel or what" posts. Maybe I'm ranting at length for nothing.
So if that's the case, then wow we sure
were dumb before. If we're still dumb right now, I guess the above applies.
