1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

A Closer Look at Philly's Offensive Philosophy

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by phinswolverinesrockets, Jun 22, 2014.

  1. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    78,865
    154,274
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    No, silly is the concept that elite means the top guy and that's it. By your very definition a guy is only elite not only if he's the best guy out there, but he must also be the best guy to ever have played...because to be "elite" means that you can't get any better, and if there's ever been someone better then obviously he could get better so by definition he's not elite.

    Listen, to each their own on what they consider "elite". I'm just saying that a standard which is defined as saying only the best player to ever have played the position can be considered elite...is too extreme. That's my personal opinion.
     
  2. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,161
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    Um, not really. That maybe is your misunderstanding of my definition, but it's not. I just listed 4 guys in the top category. Guys without significant separation. Guys that millions of fans will argue over who is the best. For years, it was just Manning and Brady. Who's number one, and who's number two? Then Brees joined and then Rodgers.

    That's a vivid imagination you have there to come up with the stuff in bold ;) I never said you couldn't get any better. Seriously, where did you come up with that?

    EDIT: Manning has been elite since 2003 or so, and yet he just had his best year last year. Not sure where you came up with "you can't get any better."
     
  3. GMJohnson

    GMJohnson New Member

    14,291
    5,841
    0
    Jan 27, 2010
    I don't disagree. But isn't it also true that Wilson couldn't replace Ryan as a drop back passer? I don't see him having much success having to put it up 35-40 times, good OL or bad. I don't see him consistently putting up 25+ points to cover for a bad defense. He's uniquely suited to play in the situation he's in, take him out of that situation and I don't think anyone would be calling him elite.

    Put him in Tannehill's shoes last year for instance. 35-40+ drop backs per game, no credible run threat, bad pass pro, scant variance in launch point, let's see what his passer rating would look like then...
     
  4. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,161
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    Add in a real bad defense, take away the top two WR and you have Matt Ryan ;). Sacked 44 times. Not as much, but pretty close.
     
  5. rafael

    rafael Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    27,213
    30,937
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    I don't agree that "elite" can or should be defined as simply the best one. Reality is that a player's fit in the system matters. For example a QB like Joe Montana was generally considered "elite" in SF, but he probably would not have been "elite" in a Coryell system. In fact, I would argue that Montana might be no better than a third stringer in such a system. That's how much of a difference a system fit can make. There have been a few players who could arguably be very good in any system, like a Marino, but even then there would be some systems that fit him better than others and where he would be better than others. I also don't agree that "elite" should be limited to some arbitrary number. There are simply times when there are more great QBs in the league than others. A non-elite QB should not be elevated because there happens to be a death of talent during his era and a great QB should not be left out simply because he happens to play in a talent rich era.

    IMO an elite QB is one that elevates and carries his team enough to allow a good team to reach a championship level. Obviously, that's still open to interpretation and opinion, but that's the definition I use.
     
  6. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin RIP Phinsational Luxury Box Club Member

    40,429
    22,542
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    IMO, the top player in the league at his position is merely that- the top player. However, "elite" represents a level of play consistent with the best to have ever played the game, not a ranking. That means you can't really put a cap on the number of elite players in the game. Either they're playing at an elite level or they're not. Now, by my standard, Russell Wilson is playing as well as Tarnkenton or Staubach did, so I'd say he's performing at an elite level.
     
    djphinfan likes this.
  7. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,161
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    Fine you guys can have your egalitarian "elite" category. My elite shall now be known as the uber-elite. Guys that I'm happy with, with no regret. if I get Brees, I'm not mad I didn't get Rodgers. If I get Rodgers, I'm not mad I didn't get Brees. If I get Big Ben, I'm happy but I'm disappointed I didn't get Brees or Rodgers!
     
    ToddPhin likes this.
  8. rafael

    rafael Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    27,213
    30,937
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    IMO Wilson in Atlanta's system he would still be a very good QB, but he wouldn't make quite as many plays as he does in a system that fits him better. My guess is that Wilson would have performed about as well Matt Ryan did for Atlanta. I think Wilson's passing ability compares very favorably to Matt Ryan's. But I don't believe Matt Ryan would have been anywhere near as good as Wilson if Ryan were in Seattle.

    Put Wilson in Tannehill's shoes and I agree that his passer rating suffers. I actually believe that Wilson would have been a little below where Tannehill was last season given that scenario. I just think Tannehill is a better passer than Wilson. Put Tannehill in Seattle the past two years and I think Seattle still wins it all. Tannehill isn't quite as good as Wilson at extending the play and I think Wilson is a little more efficient overall, but it'd be close enough that his better passing would have compensated.
     
  9. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    78,865
    154,274
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    You made it pretty clear that your definition of elite is mutually exclusive with the ability to rank. You said that if you can rank one guy over another guy, then that means one has to be "upper elite" and the other "lower elite" and that would just be ludicrous. Don't blame me for pointing out the logical fallacy there.

    Again, your definition of elite implies that for any person that has a top guy at his position, that person must only one elite player. And indeed, it must be one elite player in history.

    But now it seems that you're changing your definition of elite to guys "without significant separation"...which is very vague and subjective, and really just brings us back to the point that elite is going to mean something different for everyone. And at that point the debate about whether Ben Roethlisberger is/isn't elite because of his talent, or Ben Roethlisberger is/isn't elite because of your definition of elite...is a meaningless difference. Bottom line is one thinks he is, another thinks he's not.
     
  10. jdang307

    jdang307 Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    39,161
    21,798
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    San Diego
    There has been no change. I've always rated Brady over Manning, for personal reasons. But they were both elite. I've never said it has to be 1a 1b 1c and 1d. You put words in my mouth when you say my definition means "the top guy and that's it", which looks even more silly when my "top guy" has been 4 guys all along. Seriously.

    I've also argued I think Brees threw too many INTs but reluctantly put him in the elite category. That means I think the other 3 are ranked slightly above them. There has been no change in my definition. Just clarification. There is no logical fallacy. You still haven't even explained why you thought my definition meant the best ever and can't get any better. That's whole cloth right there.

    I think you confused yourself when you threw Lebron into the category. From my very first post it was a group of guys. All at the top, with no QB(s) ahead of them.

    yes I'm flogging the horse right about now, but I still don't get where you went from ^^^ to "the top guy, and he can't get any better."

    Anyway, yes it's "meaningless" until it's meaningful. When you are talking about where a QB ranks amongst his peers then definitions matter. It's okay we all have different definitions for our terms, as long as we understand what those differences are for each person.
     
  11. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    78,865
    154,274
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    By your own definition if you rank Brady over Manning then Brady would have to be "upper elite" and Manning would have to be "lower elite" and that's just ridiculous.

    You're contradicting your earlier statement.

    Bottom line is your definition of elite is guys who aren't "significantly" better than one another. And if that word isn't a can of subjective worms, I don't know what is.


    It's pretty simple you said that if one guy is definitely better than the other guy then one would have to be "upper elite" and the other "lower elite" and you feel that's just ridiculous, so your definition of elite is that no one is better.

    Hell, I can't possibly explain it any better than you already did:

    It's pretty damn explicit.
     
  12. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    97,717
    50,728
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    Clutch is just a metaphor for hairy..some folks get nervous..just human nature.
     
  13. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    97,717
    50,728
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    I agree that there are certain throws he will struggle with, I also know there are elite qbs who can't do what Russell can do with a football, it's all about getting the first down and scoring points, it's all about converting in crucial situations..in this modern era there are different ways to win..

    Colin Kaepernick style of qb'ing almost beat the Seahawks defense, at their house, Peyton manning was lost and couldn't get out of the pocket and got destroyed, even though he had weapons everywhere..ridiculous weapons..they swarmed and cradled the pocket, played some tight coverage and manning couldn't get it done, so let me ask you, if you face the best defense in the league, how do you wish to attack?, I'll take the dual threat skills of Russell even though there are a few throws he can't do as well as the great pocket passers, he'll make it up and win in other ways they can't.
     
  14. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    78,865
    154,274
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    Joe Flacco, Matt Stafford, Colin Kaepernick and Cam Newton have the strongest arms in the league. Some would throw Aaron Rodgers in there, not sure I would. If he deserves it, it's only because his footwork is often pretty choppy and he doesn't get proper hip turn into his throws yet he still gets the ball there with pace.

    Russell Wilson's arm is easily on par with Jay Cutler. That's not even an opinion. That's just a fact.
     
    DPlus47 likes this.
  15. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin RIP Phinsational Luxury Box Club Member

    40,429
    22,542
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    but he's already averaged 26 ppg the past 2 years, made all the more impressive by the fact he did have a great defense at his back which makes you wonder just how many more points he would've led the team to had he not been needed to take his foot off the gas.

    I think he'd look great. Close to Drew Brees. Mentally he can handle it so I'm not sure why you think he'd collapse while others in the league don't. What would set Wilson apart during 35-40+ drop backs and ensure him better success than most is the fact he knows he can rely on his feet to bail him out rather than forcing bad throws. His feet allow him to live to fight another down, if not give his offense an entire new set of 'em. This is compounded by the fact he makes great decisions, plays within himself to a high degree, understands the game, knows where to go with the ball, scans the field like a laser for a second year QB, has sound accuracy and outstanding touch, and throws with some of the best anticipation in the league. He's already proven that even a terrible offensive line isn't enough to hold him back, so why would increasing his attempts do so? He routinely rises to the occasion when his number is called, so I don't see that changing just by increasing his pass attempts.

    But let's face it, no matter who the QB is, if you can limit his pass attempts and still win games, you'll limit his pass attempts to minimize risk. If Aaron Rodgers were in Seattle, his pass attempts would be reduced as well.
     
    DPlus47 likes this.
  16. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    97,717
    50,728
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    He wouldn't have to throw 35 to 40 times a game with us..because he would be making plays that would impact the game and lessen the need to throw so much, Russell Wilson and the best he has to offer will survive with any variables around him,because he has a switch that is turned on by pressure, and pressure doesn't discriminate..the result of pressure will always look the same if it's coming out of Wilson's skillset.

    This is why I believe your way off on this particular player, which imo you rarely are, because you are using variables to describe this players game, a player who has a game that doesn't rely on variables to function.
     
  17. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin RIP Phinsational Luxury Box Club Member

    40,429
    22,542
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    hey it's only fair doc. Think about San Diego vs Miami of the 80's. I really wouldn't wanna be stuck with deciding which QB is elite just b/c there can only be one.
     
  18. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    97,717
    50,728
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    you mean like taking a Tannehill skillset trying to make it into pocket skillset instead Of a system that utilizes the entire qbs skillset.?
     
  19. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    97,717
    50,728
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    Elite is when the player reaches elite play, so like Todd says there is no number, it's whoever can get to that level of play..
     
  20. ckparrothead

    ckparrothead Draft Forum Moderator Luxury Box

    78,865
    154,274
    113
    Dec 1, 2007
    It's going to mean something different for everyone.
     
  21. rafael

    rafael Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    27,213
    30,937
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    Except I do believe that Tannehill is a good enough passer that he would eventually be at least a top 10 guy in any system. However, if he's in a system that uses his full skill set, I believe he could be as good as anyone.
     
  22. GMJohnson

    GMJohnson New Member

    14,291
    5,841
    0
    Jan 27, 2010
    Still waiting for your thoughts on the Rams game.

    35 minutes in Seattle has 5 first downs, 5 sacks allowed, yet they're still winning 7-3
    mainly bc Sherman got a pick and returned it to the Rams' 25.

    Is RW "taking his foot off the gas" again?
     
  23. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    97,717
    50,728
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    Nice cherry pickin stats buddy..

    I can find segments of ball games were your elites throw up bad numbers, then come right back to make a play at a critical time.

    Russel Wilson's game only matters in isolation, he will play the same wherever he is at, doesn't matter what skillset players he has around him, this is why he was completely overlooked in the draft, because folks couldn't isolate his play and translate it.Dont look at the things he can't do because of his size, stop comparing him to your vision of what a prototype can do from a pocket, he is unique in the way he plays the game.

    Overrated my *** GM, give it up bro, your missin how good this kid is.
     
  24. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin RIP Phinsational Luxury Box Club Member

    40,429
    22,542
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    you said it yourself. 5 sacks allowed through 35 minutes. IIRC this is when Seattle's terrible Oline gets its arse handed to it all game long in every aspect [including Lynch carrying 8 times for 23 yards], yet Wilson still finds it in himself to convert one short field opportunity into a TD instead of a FG and then finds Tate downfield for the 80 yarder to seal the win. It's gonna be tough sledding for any passer when you've got Paul f***ing McQuistan at left tackle against Robert Quinn...... and 7th round rookie Michael Bowie at RT against Chris Long. But still, amidst getting pressured from start to finish like mad, Wilson still picked his spots, got his 2 TDs, didn't turn the ball over, and his team got the win. Nuff said.
     
    DPlus47 likes this.
  25. GMJohnson

    GMJohnson New Member

    14,291
    5,841
    0
    Jan 27, 2010
    I can't believe you're crediting Wilson with the win, it was pretty much all defense in that game, on both sides. The Rams faced an elite defense, they did it with Kellen Clemens at QB and if they had won no one in their right mind would be praising Clemens for the win.

    Moving on... I was hoping you'd comment on HOW the Rams were able to have success vs Wilson. The Panthers, 49ers, Colts and Texans all had success getting after the Seattle OL, the diff with STL is that they were able to bottle him up in the pocket. RW wasn't able to elude the pressure like he did vs those other teams. They came off the edges and clogged the middle/had a spy waiting, or they blitzed up the middle and had their ends contain the edges, they didn't allow Wilson to escape.

    Which is kinda my point. Wilson's biggest weakness is throwing in rythym and/or from the pocket, that's kind of a big deal, no? Granted, it's tough to keep him bottled up like STL did, but given his size and arm talent, throwing from the pocket will continue to be an isse for his entire career.

    If you're keeping count, after the STL game Seattle was 6-1. Their D allowed 7, 3, 14 in a blowout, 6, 13, and 9 points in the wins and in only two of those games did they lead by more than 7 pts going into the 4th. So your theory about Wilson taking his foot off the gas has very little merit, he ain't toning it down to protect big leads, these are close games going down to the final possessions. The only game where Seattle's D was bad was vs Indy when they allowed 27, and RW failed to pick up the slack for his defense. In 19 games only 3 times did they allow more than 20. Miami's D allowed 20+ in 4 of their first 5 games, then twice vs NE, once vs NY, vs Carolina, Tampa, Cincy, and Pitt, while still finishing top 10 in scoring D. IJS, it's nice to be Russell Wilson.
     
  26. ToddPhin

    ToddPhin RIP Phinsational Luxury Box Club Member

    40,429
    22,542
    113
    Jul 6, 2012
    NC
    I'm not crediting Wilson with the win.... but the fact remains- St Louis's D was the stingiest that day allowing 135 total yards [including just 23 to Lynch] while Seattle allowed 339, yet it was Wilson who threw for 2 TDs and got the win while not turning the ball over in the face of all that crazy pressure. Seriously, c'mon, how many QB's do you know of who can get beat up and harassed THAT BADLY amidst a tight game and not give the ball to the other team? That in and of itself is worth something.

    I can comment on how the Rams were able to have success vs Wilson.
    1. You put the NFL's best pass rusher against the NFL's worst left tackle [who is actually a guard] for starters.
    2. then sprinkle in a premier veteran SDE against a 7th round rookie RT.
    3. add in a pair of the worst blocking guards in the league.
    4. subtract Harvin & Rice so that you're left with a mediocre overall receiving corps.
    5. subtract a ground game from Lynch who suffered worse than Wilson that day [and he's an elite back].
    6. Then you add a spy for good measure which St Louis could effectively do b/c it's virtually given that Quinn & Long will have Wilson running for his life all game thanks to his putrid protection.

    I don't understand your emphasis behind this Rams game. It's like you expect him to be able to do what no other QB is capable of in that situation.

    Maybe that's where we differ b/c I don't see him having any more of a size issue or pocket issue than Brees. You've understandably made a huge deal about Tannehill's poor protection and how it affected his game and thus was a priority this offseason to help him take that next step[which I agree with], so I don't understand how you don't see that Wilson virtually defies the laws of quarterbacking by playing stellar behind pass protection that was even worse than Tannehill's.

    Football Outsiders had Seattle's pass pro ranked the worst of the past 2 years with an adjusted sack rate of 9.6%, and that's WITH Wilson at QB. To put it into perspective, without Wilson at QB, their abomination of a line would've allowed 70+ sacks. That's what he had to work with... plus a mediocre receiving corpse to boot..... yet he still posted a 101.2 Passer Rating [6th in NFL], 26 TDs [more than Brady and tied with Matt Ryan], 6.4 TD% [3rd in NFL], a mere 9 INTs, 8.25 YPA [4th in NFL], 36 completions over 25 yards [3rd in NFL], the 4th best First Down Percentage, and the 6th best Passer Rating in 4+ WR sets [which speaks to his ability to perform in crunch situations or with the game on his shoulders in obvious passing situations]. This was not a game manager who threw 15 TDs and didn't take shots downfield.

    Wilson was blitzed 170 times, and despite that porous Oline he posted a 103.3 Passer Rating with an 8.65 YPA, 12 TD, 4 INT.
    To illustrate his consistency at all levels of the field, he posted a 100.3 Rating from 1-10 yards, 113.3 Rating from 11-20 yards, 114.1 from 21-30 yards, and a 93.8 Rating from 31-40 yards.

    By comparison, Tannehill was 22nd in Passer Rating, 20th in TD%, 25th in YPA, 19th in completions over 25 yards, 16th in First Down Percentage, and 20th in 4+ WR Passer Rating. Wilson totaled 2 more touchdowns and 13 more completions over 25 yards than Tannehill despite 180 fewer attempts. Tannehill was blitzed 177 times with a 86.8 Rating, 7.98 YPA, 6 TD, 4 INT. Tannehill's Passer Rating was 93.0 from 1-10 yards, 66.8 from 11-20 yards, 47.6 from 21-30 yards, and 36.3 from 31-40 yards.

    ??? I don't follow.

    Game 10 vs Atlanta:
    Seattle up 23-3 at halftime. Wilson passed for 229 yards and 2 TDs in the first half to get the lead, then attempted 6 passes in the 2nd half while Seattle ran it 28 times. You were saying?????

    Game 11 vs Vikings :
    Seattle up 24-13 at half. Quality lead vs a bad offense. Wilson threw for 173 yards and a TD in the first half. Attempted 6 passes in the 2nd half. You were saying???

    Game 12 vs Saints: Seattle up 34-7 through 3 qtrs, as Wilson already has 298 yards and 3 TDs. Attempted 3 passes in the 4th qtr as Seattle ran it 12 times.

    Game 14 vs Giants: Seattle up 16-0 through 3 qtrs. Attempted 3 passes in 4th qtr. You were saying??

    Game 16 vs Rams: Seattle up 20-7 through 3 qtrs. Attempted 4 passes in 4th qtr.

    Game 2 vs 49ers: Seattle up 12-3 through 3 qtrs. Wilson threw a TD to start the 4th qtr to blow it open, then attempts 3 passes the final 14 minutes.

    Game 3 vs Jags: Seattle up 31-0 through 33 minutes as Wilson already threw 4 TDs and 202 yards. He then attempted 3 passes the final 27 minutes as Tavaris Jackson yet again saw mop up duty.

    Game 7 vs Zona: Seattle up 24-13 through the middle of 3rd qtr, as Wilson already passed for 3 TDs and 200 yards. He attempted 5 passes the final 23 minutes. You were saying?

    Thats 8 games where Wilson's foot was significantly taken off the gas in the 2nd half. But if you need more statistical support: Wilson attempted 130 passes in the 2nd Quarter but just 73 in the 4th. Meanwhile Seattle rushed 128 times in the 2nd Quarter and 143 in the 4th. BTW, his 2nd quarter was good for 1263 yards, 11 TDs, 0 INT, 9.72 YPA, and 125.3 rating.... so it seems as though he may be at his best the more he throws and gets in a rhythm, rather than limiting him like you suggest. Let's not forget Wilson rises to the occasion in the 4th quarter when needed, evidence by his league-leading 8 4th Qtr Comeback wins the past 2 years, so it's not like Seattle is saying "PHEW" in Mark Sanchez fashion every time they have a 2nd half lead and can run the ball to eat up clock while limiting pass attempts.

    it is? I don't think it's nice to have BY FAR the worst pass protection in the league coupled with a mediocre receiving corpse. What does Brady do when he gets his butt handed to him as badly as Wilson got pressured all year? He folds. You saw what happened to Manning against Seattle's pressure, well that would've been Peyton on a weekly basis if he had Seattle's Oline in front of him. Say it with me, 101.4 Passer Rating and all those top 6 passing stats behind the worst Oline in football.

    Yes, Seattle's defensive aspect is nice, but please stop pretending like Seattle has an inept offense under Wilson that routinely wins games 13-10 because of great defense. Wilson's offense ranked 8th in scoring despite terrible protection and mediocre receivers and despite taking the foot off the gas in the 4th quarter. Seattle has scored less than 20 points just 4 times in their last 30 games. During Aaron Rodgers' 2010 SB season, Green Bay did it 6 times in 16 games. The 2012 Falcons with Ryan, Julio, Roddy, and Gonzalez, which you seem to think is a scoring machine by your Matt Ryan references, scored 26.3 PPG [compared to Seattle's 26.1] and that's with Atlanta's offense likely being pressed to score more than Seattle's. BTW, Matt Ryan threw 0 TDs & 5 INTs last year against Zona while Atlanta won 23-19.... and 1 TD & 3 INTs against Oakland while Atlanta won 23-20.

    PS:
    Matt Ryan's passer rating on attempts 31-40 last year was 71.2. Even he should be under 30/game.
    Ryan's 4th quarter rating was 74.2, with more INTs than Wilson had all four quarters. (Wilson 93.1)
    Ryan's rating when trailing was 82.1. (Wilson 91.9)
    Ryan's rating vs the blitz was 81.6. (Wilson 103.3)
    Ryan's rating the last 2 minutes of half was 60.3 with 4 TDs and 6 INTs. (Wilson 106.2, 6 TD, 2 INT)
    Ryan - 26 TDs without his weapons and with shoddy protection. Wilson - 26 TDs with worse protection. Ryan required 250 more attempts.
    So yes, I'll talk Wilson.
     
    DPlus47 likes this.

Share This Page