View from the other side of the fence.

[zulater]

Will Andy Dalton ever be special?

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/daugherty-blog/2014/12/08/doc-tml-mon/20084417/

When The Men lose, they don't mess around. Every L this fall has been monstrous, and revealing of all the reasons this team will not be as special as it believes it can be. First place is nice, but after Sunday you have to think it's illusory. To approach the elite, you have to beat the elite, occasionally. Or at least stay in the game. Without further ado. . .

TEN THINGS. . .

1. As of today, The Men lack the It Factor. It's dangerous to make broad statements when discussing NFL teams. But the Bengals have such a long and consistent record of slipping in the footlights, this broad statement seems fairly safe.

2. I wonder now, given the incessant hiccups on the big stage, if the players don't have some of the same skepticism the rest of us do. I keep waiting for a big Dalton, next-level breakthrough. Now, I'm starting to believe it ain't coming. He is who he is. The great QBs elevate their teams. The others need their teams to elevate them. Anyone dispute which group Andy's in?

This might strike some of you as a Duh statement. But I have reserved judgment, believing (falling for?) logic that suggested Dalton was still maturing, that he'd bloom under Hue Jax, that he was assuming a leadership role etc. etc.

With every big-game L, and every game he starts (64 and counting) I believe more that he's a finished, or nearly finished, product. Good, never transcendent, mostly beholden to the people around him. For a team with January aspirations, that's not enough.

3. Stats are for those who don't watch the games. Stat people will look at Dalton's numbers and assume he had a very good game. And numbers-wise, he most certainly did. But his messed-up non-exchange with J. Hill turned the game. Major footlights pratfall.

[Mojouw]

Which is a worse problem; never being able to beat crappy teams or never being able to beat playoff caliber teams?

[zulater]

Which is a worse problem; never being able to beat crappy teams or never being able to beat playoff caliber teams?


Good question. Wish I had a good answer for you. Kinda like having a gifted kid who rarely pays attention in class, doesn't do his homework, bluffs an answer when called upon, but come test time almost always comes up with an A. Ends up with a C+ or B- grade for the subject, but you damn well if he applied himself he'd be a straight A student. As opposed to the kid who grinds out a B by keeping perfect notes, never missing an assignment, but come test day just gets that mediocre 85 every time.

Who's going further in life? You don't know? Sometimes it's the grinder sometimes it's the kid who things come easy to. You just wish the first kid had a little bit of the moxie the second kid does, because you know that kid would never fail.

Confused yet? Think this analogy hits close to home? :lol: Not telling. :chuckle:

[Dwinsgames]

Good question. Wish I had a good answer for you. Kinda like having a gifted kid who rarely pays attention in class, doesn't do his homework, bluffs an answer when called upon, but come test time almost always comes up with an A. Ends up with a C+ or B- grade for the subject, but you damn well if he applied himself he'd be a straight A student. As opposed to the kid who grinds out a B by keeping perfect notes, never missing an assignment, but come test day just gets that mediocre 85 every time.

Who's going further in life? You don't know? Sometimes it's the grinder sometimes it's the kid who things come easy to. You just wish the first kid had a little bit of the moxie the second kid does, because you know that kid would never fail.

Confused yet? Think this analogy hits close to home? :lol: Not telling. :chuckle:

excellent analogy , but I fear many just won't quite fully get it

[Mojouw]

Well, you will feel better about the "grinder" and will be immensely frustrated by the slacker/underperformer, but the grinder is never going to hoist a Lombardi.

[zulater]

Well, you will feel better about the "grinder" and will be immensely frustrated by the slacker/underperformer, but the grinder is never going to hoist a Lombardi.

I get that. But when you come across the gifted grinder you're in real trouble. Seriously hate the Patriots all you want. But that describes them in a nutshell.

[fansince'76]

excellent analogy , but I fear many just won't quite fully get it

No, I get it just fine - it's the tried-but-true "Ben is lazy" fallacy. And it's never been more fallacious than it is right now.

One doesn't put up the best numbers of one's career by slacking off...

[zulater]

No, I get it just fine - it's the tried-but-true "Ben is lazy" fallacy. And it's never been more fallacious than it is right now.

One doesn't put up the best numbers of one's career by slacking off...

Uh, no it wasn't. It was the my son is lazy fact that inspired that post.:sofunny: But he's doing better since he graduated last spring. Got a full time job and takes college courses at night. So I shouldn't complain. But damn that kid could have graduated with honors if he only gave a damn.

[zulater]

Got a theory on Ben. Goes like this. Last week on twitter very early in the game Chidi tweeted something to the effect that Ben was displaying poor fundamentals on his passes. That his base was way off and he was throwing off his front foot as a result. I can dig the tweets up later if anyone demands it. Anyway yesterday during the network broadcast the exact same point was alluded to, brought up in the context of talking to Haley about Ben's poor game and overthrows the week before. Said the problem was addressed and that Ben focused on correcting his mechanics through the week, and sure enough the results seemed in evidence yesterday with Ben's improved play.

So how does this happen? Probably it was a gradual thing, his mechanics got away from him, but overall his results were way more good than bad, so no one brings it up until his play bottoms out.

Just a theory? :noidea:

[GBMelBlount]

Will Andy Dalton ever be special?

Perhaps when the heat is on his crotch actually does catch on fire.

[Dwinsgames]

Got a theory on Ben. Goes like this. Last week on twitter very early in the game Chidi tweeted something to the effect that Ben was displaying poor fundamentals on his passes. That his base was way off and he was throwing off his front foot as a result. I can dig the tweets up later if anyone demands it. Anyway yesterday during the network broadcast the exact same point was alluded to, brought up in the context of talking to Haley about Ben's poor game and overthrows the week before. Said the problem was addressed and that Ben focused on correcting his mechanics through the week, and sure enough the results seemed in evidence yesterday with Ben's improved play.

So how does this happen? Probably it was a gradual thing, his mechanics got away from him, but overall his results were way more good than bad, so no one brings it up until his play bottoms out.

Just a theory? :noidea:

I posted the tweet here someplace or the pic anyways ... will also look for it

- - - Updated - - -


No, I get it just fine - it's the tried-but-true "Ben is lazy" fallacy. And it's never been more fallacious than it is right now.

One doesn't put up the best numbers of one's career by slacking off...

as I was saying ...

I did not take it in a football sense and never had Ben in my mind when reading it

[Dwinsgames]

http://540580249483091968


and there was another one with a better view , still looking .....


here it is ...

http://539291878014087168


and he is spot on with what he is saying in the clips ...

no leg drive , no front foot /weight transfer /follow through causes passes to sail and float ..

that is QB 101 , not rocket science

the question is why .... it hasn't been a problem in the past and now all the sudden we are seeing a abnormal amount of high off target throws ... something underlying ? I don't know and won't pretend to but something is a bit off

[Psycho Ward 86]

Got a theory on Ben. Goes like this. Last week on twitter very early in the game Chidi tweeted something to the effect that Ben was displaying poor fundamentals on his passes. That his base was way off and he was throwing off his front foot as a result. I can dig the tweets up later if anyone demands it. Anyway yesterday during the network broadcast the exact same point was alluded to, brought up in the context of talking to Haley about Ben's poor game and overthrows the week before. Said the problem was addressed and that Ben focused on correcting his mechanics through the week, and sure enough the results seemed in evidence yesterday with Ben's improved play.

So how does this happen? Probably it was a gradual thing, his mechanics got away from him, but overall his results were way more good than bad, so no one brings it up until his play bottoms out.

Just a theory? :noidea:

well yeah, but thats been fairly frequent. Ben has been a streaky somewhat inconsistent player most of his career. Anytime he does something super impressive and he regains national attention, he drops an egg and he's dismissed again as an elite QB. i havent disagreed with that sentiment for the last couple of years. that doesnt mean i dont fully appreciate Ben. Ben still needs to find his consistency. Yes, his consistency also depends on the guys around him but he still misses easy automatic plays sometimes for no reason at all

[ALLD]

Throwing off the back foot is sometimes due to lack of preparation, distractions or mental laziness. Was looking like Ben wasn't even warmed up until the 3rd quarter. If you ever watched professional boxing, not sweating going into the ring is a sure way to get KO'd in the 1st round.

[tube517]

As far as Ben, he improved alot from that QB coach, Whitfield, during his suspension. It's been 4 years so he got lazy.

The question about what does Colbert do was asked in another thread. What does Fichtner do?

[zulater]

Throwing off the back foot is sometimes due to lack of preparation, distractions or mental laziness. Was looking like Ben wasn't even warmed up until the 3rd quarter. If you ever watched professional boxing, not sweating going into the ring is a sure way to get KO'd in the 1st round.

I guess we weren't watching the same game? Or maybe I wasn't paying close enough attention? I didn't think Ben was that off target at anytime yesterday. Yeah our red zone possession at the end of the half fizzled, but I thought that was more due to Ben being over cautious than off target. With no time outs he can't afford to take a sack, so he might have hurried a throw or two. But overall I thought he played a solid if not spectacular first half. Remember he was going against a pretty good defense, and Bell was still feeling things out( early). So it wasn't exactly downhill sledding. My impression. Ben played a strong 4 quarters. Had he played to that level in any of our 3 most recent losses those games are wins.

I think you're looking for perfection. And that just doesn't exist. Not even in Bradyland, Rodgersville, or Peyton Place. Get real. :coffee:

[Dwinsgames]

What does Fichtner do?

you mean other than collect and easy paycheck ? not much is my guess

[ALLD]

I guess we weren't watching the same game? Or maybe I wasn't paying close enough attention? I didn't think Ben was that off target at anytime yesterday. Yeah our red zone possession at the end of the half fizzled, but I thought that was more due to Ben being over cautious than off target. With no time outs he can't afford to take a sack, so he might have hurried a throw or two. But overall I thought he played a solid if not spectacular first half. Remember he was going against a pretty good defense, and Bell was still feeling things out( early). So it wasn't exactly downhill sledding. My impression. Ben played a strong 4 quarters. Had he played to that level in any of our 3 most recent losses those games are wins.

I think you're looking for perfection. And that just doesn't exist. Not even in Bradyland, Rodgersville, or Peyton Place. Get real. :coffee:

I was referring to the previous week in addition to the other dogs.

[zulater]

you mean other than collect and easy paycheck ? not much is my guess

chidi for qb coach!! :lol:

[steelreserve]

One of my biggest fears after Ben retires is NOT that we end up with a bad QB ... it's that we end up with a QB like Dalton or Romo or Cutler, where they look pretty good, just enough of the time that the coaches aren't going to risk giving the job to someone else, but as a fan you know as long as they're around you're not winning shit. The hugely inflated QB salaries of today mean that you're going to have a lot of Derek Andersons that turn into ill-advised 6-year experiments, because no way are you going to admit you were wrong and flush $100M down the toilet.

A bad QB you can suffer through, get rid of after a season or even half a season, and move on. One of the other kind can set you back a decade.

[Psycho Ward 86]

One of my biggest fears after Ben retires is NOT that we end up with a bad QB ... it's that we end up with a QB like Dalton or Romo or Cutler, where they look pretty good, just enough of the time that the coaches aren't going to risk giving the job to someone else, but as a fan you know as long as they're around you're not winning shit. The hugely inflated QB salaries of today mean that you're going to have a lot of Derek Andersons that turn into ill-advised 6-year experiments, because no way are you going to admit you were wrong and flush $100M down the toilet.

A bad QB you can suffer through, get rid of after a season or even half a season, and move on. One of the other kind can set you back a decade.

Wow. This post. Here here.

[zulater]

One of my biggest fears after Ben retires is NOT that we end up with a bad QB ... it's that we end up with a QB like Dalton or Romo or Cutler, where they look pretty good, just enough of the time that the coaches aren't going to risk giving the job to someone else, but as a fan you know as long as they're around you're not winning shit. The hugely inflated QB salaries of today mean that you're going to have a lot of Derek Andersons that turn into ill-advised 6-year experiments, because no way are you going to admit you were wrong and flush $100M down the toilet.

A bad QB you can suffer through, get rid of after a season or even half a season, and move on. One of the other kind can set you back a decade.

Great points! :applaudit:

[polamalubeast]

One of my biggest fears after Ben retires is NOT that we end up with a bad QB ... it's that we end up with a QB like Dalton or Romo or Cutler, where they look pretty good, just enough of the time that the coaches aren't going to risk giving the job to someone else, but as a fan you know as long as they're around you're not winning shit. The hugely inflated QB salaries of today mean that you're going to have a lot of Derek Andersons that turn into ill-advised 6-year experiments, because no way are you going to admit you were wrong and flush $100M down the toilet.

A bad QB you can suffer through, get rid of after a season or even half a season, and move on. One of the other kind can set you back a decade.

Maybe it will be as the packers or the Colts too....We'll see


It took 21 years to get a real QB after Bradshaw but we must not forget that the Steelers had the chance to have Dan Marino in 1983....If the Steelers have a chance,they must not miss this chance

[GBMelBlount]

Maybe it will be as the packers or the Colts too....We'll see

It took 21 years to get a real QB after Bradshaw but we must not forget that the Steelers had the chance to have Dan Marino in 1983....If the Steelers have a chance,they must not miss this chance

Thing is you never know for sure who will pan out and who won't

Does anyone know roughly what percentage of starting QB's were first round picks....

and also how many were the first QB's picked in their draft class??

...or say top ten?

IF the hit ratio is much much higher with first round and / or high first round picks then that is the one position that it would seem to me IS MOST worth trading up for.

[Dwinsgames]

Thing is you never know for sure who will pan out and who won't

Does anyone know roughly what percentage of starting QB's were first round picks....

and also how many were the first QB's picked in their draft class??

...or say top ten?

IF the hit ratio is much much higher with first round and / or high first round picks then that is the one position that it would seem to me IS MOST worth trading up for.


keep in mind Alex Smith was a 1st over all pick Aaron Rogers went in the mid 20s same year ...

could name a TON of top 5 picks that sucked but you know part of the equation of whether a QB is successful or not is his surrounding cast and when you are being picked number 1 over all or even top 5 the rest of the team normally SUCKS , that reduces your chances of ever obtaining success even if you are good enough so figuring an accurate number could be difficult if not impossible with any degree of certainty of actually blown picks or ruined talent ... do you follow ?

but whomever wants to take a stab at it is more than welcome this site will be plenty helpful in doing so ...

http://drafthistory.com/


(http://drafthistory.com/)

[GBMelBlount]

keep in mind Alex Smith was a 1st over all pick Aaron Rogers went in the mid 20s same year ...

could name a TON of top 5 picks that sucked but you know part of the equation of whether a QB is successful or not is his surrounding cast and when you are being picked number 1 over all or even top 5 the rest of the team normally SUCKS , that reduces your chances of ever obtaining success even if you are good enough so figuring an accurate number could be difficult if not impossible with any degree of certainty of actually blown picks or ruined talent ... do you follow ?

but whomever wants to take a stab at it is more than welcome this site will be plenty helpful in doing so ...

http://drafthistory.com/


(http://drafthistory.com/)

Thanks D.

I do get what you mean. Very good points.

However if a team really sucks and gets a truly great quarterback shouldn't they suck a lot less and the difference be noticeable?

For instance, what did Ben go his rookie year, 15-1?

Granted we were a very good team overall but I could see Ben having gone to a crappy team and made them average as an example.

Also, don't you think that most first round QB's are given enough time and chances in most cases to make it IF they are that good.

Look at the backup for Cincy...they mentioned he was a first round pick and spent 6 years as a starter but sounds like he was just not THAT good though given ample time?

However I bet as you get farther down the draft picks there have been a number of lower round picks that could have been very good but never got the chance simply by virtue of being a lower round pick.

[Dwinsgames]

Thanks D.

I do get what you mean. Very good points.

However if a team really sucks and gets a truly great quarterback shouldn't they suck a lot less and the difference be noticeable?

For instance, what did Ben go his rookie year, 15-1?

Granted we were a very good team overall but I could see Ben having gone to a crappy team and made them average as an example.

Also, don't you think that most first round QB's are given enough time and chances in most cases to make it IF they are that good.

Look at the backup for Cincy...they mentioned he was a first round pick and spent 6 years as a starter but sounds like he was just not THAT good though given ample time?

However I bet as you get farther down the draft picks there have been a number of lower round picks that could have been very good but never got the chance simply by virtue of being a lower round pick.

Many really bad teams have no weapons , no line and no defense .. making it really tough to do anything ... let alone make them half decent ... in some rare cases you may see a difference


I am sure you have equal examples of the other side of the coin ...

also .. when your teams sucks you tend to fall into bad habits that you never recover from and in the process lose your job ...

Tommy Maddox pretty good example was way to young high expectations , got a shot to play sucked and never recovered until he was in his 30s and had a good run in the XFL to then get a chance here and played pretty well till he got his bell rung and nearly paralyzed then he sucked once again ...

[Lady Steel]

Guys, seriously... Have no fear! Landry Jones is here! http://randomtopics.org/images/smilies/giggle%20girl.gif

[Dwinsgames]

GB ...

If I where the one to take on the task ( and I am not going to be that guy ) what I would look at as the primary focus point is the guys who played QB in the SB over the last say 15 years ( both guys winners and losers ) after all getting to the big game is what the entire season is about anyways right ?

sure it will lessen the sample size but since the SB is the goal should it not be the measuring stick ?

[Mojouw]

GB ...

If I where the one to take on the task ( and I am not going to be that guy ) what I would look at as the primary focus point is the guys who played QB in the SB over the last say 15 years ( both guys winners and losers ) after all getting to the big game is what the entire season is about anyways right ?

sure it will lessen the sample size but since the SB is the goal should it not be the measuring stick ?

I did not feel like making any summary tables or anything, but here is the raw data for 2000-2014.

http://pfref.com/tiny/Jw1un

[ALLD]

When talking about QBs, do exactly the opposite of what Cleveland does. *Special mention to the Foreskins and their running QB.

[Dwinsgames]

I did not feel like making any summary tables or anything, but here is the raw data for 2000-2014.

http://pfref.com/tiny/Jw1un

or just go here and in the drop down of each game select box score and get the starting QBs from that contest http://www.nfl.com/superbowl/history