Matt Moore in the Panthers Hurry-up Offense
by bigdavis on Nov 2, 2010 1:31 PM EDT
Email
Print
The hurry-up offense is our most effective weapon. I've been saying that for a few weeks now. Every really good drive that the Panthers have had this year has come from a 2 minute drill (or much less) that Matt Moore has engineered, starting from the 1st game vs the Giants, where he went 50 yds in less than 33 seconds, to throw the go-ahead TD, end of the 1st half. 
Pictured via cdn0.sbnation.com
Matt Moore throws a pass against the Rams.
The INTs he's thrown this year have far overshadowed his accomplishments, in the eyes of a lot of others on this board. But the word <engineered> that I used above is the key. These aren't scripted drives; he's running the show in these hurry-up sequences. And that's probably WHY they work, or part of it. He doesn't have to use the crap the OC sends in, but works from the shotgun, usually with 4 WRs and Goodson the lone back (who, incidentally, has turned into a really fine blocker - notice when the D sends only 4, Goodson leaks out as a safety valve receiver; when they bring 5 or more, he stays to pickup the blitzer - he's far better at it than Williams, Stewart, or Fiammetta, especially.)
To give my idea some substance, I'm taking the time to enumerate each hurry-up drive Moore's run this year. See if it doesn't open some eyes, as to just how effective he's been. Analysis after the jump...
7th drive, behind 9-14, when he takes over at midfield, 0:33 left in the half. He takes 0:24 to score. The play sequence is: pass complete to LaFell for 8, incomplete pass, complete to Smith for 10 (FD), complete to Goodson for 13 (FD), complete to Smith for 19 and a TD, to go up 16-14.
13th drive, behind 18-31, 2:38 left in game. Gross misses block > sack/fumble > knocked out of game with concussion.
Game 2 (TB)
I maintained, and still do, that Fox should've rested Moore this game, to fully recover from the concussion the previous week. He threw a TD pass in the second quarter, but it wasn't from the hurry-up, so let's move on. Later, the 4th series, started at the 7:36 mark of the second quarter, consumed 5 minutes, gaining 55 yds, but ended with a punt, after a sack. Moore was replaced by Clausen in the 4th quarter.
Game 3 (CIN) Moore DNP
Game 4 (N.O.) Moore DNP
Game 5 (CHI)
Moore replaces Clausen at the 3:35 mark of the 4th quarter, not hurry-up yet. His second pass is the one that Armanti Edwards couldn't hold onto, and the pass took a crazy bounce off his hands, then his knee, right into the arms of Brian Urlacher, for one of the several INTs counted against Moore, but very unlucky.
15th series, 1:56 left, the game is out of hand, down 6-23, but no huddle, hurry-up, from the shotgun, so I'll recap it: We start at our 40, after their KO goes OOB. Pass complete to King for 14 (FD), incompletion, incomplete, complete to Clowney for 5, complete to King (on 4th and 5) for 6 (FD), complete to Gettis for 9, spike to stop clock with 0:14 left, Hail Mary in EZ where Gettis doesn't try for it, another BS INT on Moore's record, ending the game.
Game 6 (SF)
A 10-play drive, culminating in a tying TD pass (10-10) started at the 8:44 mark of the 2Q, so I won't include that.
Our 6th series began with 1:12 left in the half, though, and featured Moore in the SG, in the hurry-up, so I will. From our 20, he goes: Pass complete to LaFell for 9, complete to Gettis for 6 (FD), and then sacked by a safety blitz.
Series 12, we're down 13-20, 4:30 left in the game, start at our 37. From here on, all plays are from the shotgun, hurry-up offense. Pass complete to LaFell for 9, complete to Gettis for 4 (FD), complete to LaFell for 9, incomplete (tipped at LOS), false start on Garry Williams, complete to Rosario for 10 (FD), illegal contact penalty on them (FD), complete to D-Will for 4, again complete to D-Will for 4, and with 1:59 left, 23 yd TD to Gettis in the EZ to tie it, 20-20.
Series 13, 1:08 left, still tied, from our 43, after the Marshall INT, Moore goes pass complete to LaFell for 35 (FD), and after 3 runs to kill clock, we kick the winning FG.
Game 7 (STL)
Series 5, Q2, down 0-10, 2:00 left in half, shotgun, hurry-up. Moore goes: pass complete to Smith for 12 (FD), complete to Stewart for 7, complete to Smith for 20 (FD), complete to Goodson for 2, calling Time Out with 0:55 left, complete to Goodson for 1, incomplete to LaFell deep right sidelines (announcer Charles Davis says LaFell cut his route short) We settle for a FG, to make it 3-10.
Series 10, Q4, down 10-20, 2:28 left. We start from our 2, after a downed kick. Game is probably out of reach, barring a miracle, but it's hurry-up, from the gun, so I'm including it. Pass complete to Goodson for 4, complete to LaFell for 5 (he stopped his slant pattern a yard short of the FD marker (?), complete to Smith for 5 (FD), and the last pass, downfield to Smith is intercepted, due to Smith running a lazy route, and not turning to the ball. Moore is shown to be mad as hell, and later quoted, when asked what happened on the play to make him angry, "a lot."
So let's tote it all up.
Moore has run a hurry-up, shotgun (many times no-huddle) offense at the end of 2nd and 4th quarters, a total of 7 times.
Total time elapsed: 10:04
Plays run: 39 (including 3 rushes, and 2 penalties)
Completions/Attempts: 26/34
First Downs made (not counting scoring plays): 11 (that's more than 1 a minute)
Yards Gained (not counting FG yardages): 256 (that's 25 yds per minute)
TDs: 2
FGs: 2
Points produced: 20
For you statistical ratio types, here are some interesting percentages: the above represent just 5.3% of the time we've had on offense, through our first 7 games, and 9.1% of all the plays we've run. Yet they account for 21.2% of our pass completions, on only 14.9 of our pass attempts, 10.9% of our First Downs, 14.5% of our yardage, 22% of our FGs, and 25% of our TDs! That's 24% of our offensive scoring, in 5.3% of the time.
Summary: after looking at these figures, how can anybody say Matt Moore doesn't have:
1) control of his offense?
2) no need for a running game to make him effective?
3) the efficiency to be an "elite" QB, given proper blocking protection?
4) the brains and accuracy to run his own offense (screw Davidson and his runs up the middle on 1st downs)
...and 5) why the hell don't we shake things up, and run this hurry-up offense ALL THE TIME? It would wear down defenses, through eliminating their free substitutions, would energize our team and fans, and would increase our scoring by a multiple of what it's been.
I intend to send this post to Tom Sorenson at the Observer. I'm tired of Moore getting toasted for failures that aren't of his making. Maybe Tom will shed some public light on the subject.
The content of these posts are those of the user/fan making the post only
388 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Last week
I said to my brother that Matt Moore is better at calling plays then the OC.
This sig is dedicated to those cut in the 2009 purge.
by chinchillas sword on Nov 2, 2010 1:01 PM EDT reply actions
Song remains the same as last year
Jake Delhomme was extremely successful running the hurry up offense, which sparked many of us to suggest (both tongue in cheek and later realistically) that Delhomme should be the OC.
All the stats you show are true, accurate and can’t be refuted… but in the end you’re talking about a team who discuss running a flea flicker to be akin to going to Disneyland in terms of it’s level of surprise and asking that they let a guy with 12 starts run the offense like Peyton Manning; I wish we’d shake it up… I just don’t see it.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
If he can run it like Peyton (and I pretty much showed he does, already, not 'could'), why not try it?
My suggestions to shake things up:
1) Hurry up all the time, til a defense finds a way to slow it down
2) Goodson in the backfield, in place of Fiammetta
3) Hardy to replace Brayton at RDE, spell him with Brown when he needs a breather.
4) Score ‘til they cry for their Mamas.
5) Start next week against the Saints. After their emotional win over the Steelers, and with their bye coming up, they’re as complacent about us as it can get.
I agree.... why not try it?
Unfortunately all this stuff:
- Rosario at WR
- Armanti running the wildcat
- Williams or Stewart and Goodson backfield
- Hardy starting
They’re all representative of a creativity spurned by a true desire to improve the team’s station. I didn’t buy that the apathy and malaise were shaken off by the 49ers win and it seems that the good changes that were put into effect for the 2010 Panthers (Moore starting, offensive line shakeup) will not be continued to fix the problems that were there on Sunday.
Cat Scratch Reader's resident optimist.
And why not Blitz Norwood everyother 3rd down
by RjTheMetalhead on Nov 2, 2010 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions
He was in on a few plays, but made only 1 tackle, I believe. Did not blitz.
Anderson is pretty much our designated blitzer, with Marshall coming on one play, but getting there a step slow. Had he not been tentative, but all out, like the Rams’ Otagwe was, he could’ve gotten the sack from the blind side. (Don’t send a boy to do a man’s work.)
Lol Moore does not deserve to even be in the same sentence as Peyton
I mean I love Moore and all but he is not a good starting QB. Let alone deserving to be compared to peyton. Peyton MAKES his team look like Pro Bowlers no matter who they are
He only runs the hurry-up as well.
That’s all this is about, anyway. Peyton Manning is the best I’ve ever seen, and I saw all Marino’s games in his prime. No-one else made WRs into stars like those 2.
Maybe we can trade Davidson to Cleveland for Delhomme...
And let Delhomme be our OC who basically just helps Moore with pointers on running the hurry up offense.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
by BW Smith on Nov 2, 2010 1:29 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
At this point they would pay us to keep Davidson.
Their current OC has the awareness to call Colt McCoy to a 300 yard day in his first NFL start. With nothing more, possibly less at the WR or TE positions.
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
by ERL on Nov 2, 2010 1:44 PM EDT up reply actions
The Browns
have a good O-line and Hillis is a good receiver out of the back field.
by RjTheMetalhead on Nov 2, 2010 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions
How irnic is it...
that our QB seems to perform better in a ‘Hurry up’ offense for a coach that prefers a ‘slow it down’ approach. Something has to give!!
Well, I guess that underlines that the losses stem from the system, doesn't it?
Play to your strength. At the present, what I presented is the ONLY strength we’ve got this year.
Yes, any argument could rightfully say that Moore has made a slew of turnovers and some horrible decisions. I’m not excusing, nor denying them. But it’s obvious that he performs at a whole different level when he’s running the hurry-up. So….
If the OC wants to stay obstinate, and not see what he’s got, and when it works, well, he’s just as big a waste as most here consider him to be.
my opinion
is that the biggest change that needs to be made, is to the scheme and game plan. This team has no real identity on offense. Find that, and the wins come with it. We cant say we are a running team, if we cant run the ball. 8 games in is way more than enough to show the 2010 Panthers are not a running team, at least in the way davidson is trying to force it. We should be more guerrilla war fare in our tactics… hit quick, and change, change again, hit quick…
after half the season is gone
and he was used incorrectly, you probably are right. but claussen won’t fare much better if stuff isn’t fixed soon
Clausen? Who mentioned Clausen??
The only thing Clausen has ever hurried up is his throws to the sidelines.
When he produces 25 yds a minute, or goes 26/34 over ANY time span, we’ll include him in the discussion.
You can’t plug just ANY QB into a hurry-up offense. It requires special skills: a quick release, accuracy, and great clock management… oh, and not fumbling snaps.
that was reply fail
to the just accept it comment, about Moore not being the future. I totally agree with you.
and
it also underscores that no matter who you put under center, under this run your head into the wall offensive scheme, all of our quarterbacks would struggle. Moore is definitely the choice to run the hurry-up, as you suggest. None of them would succeed long term, without redefining who this team is
I can only be hopeful that a change is coming, such as what I suggest.
They put Hayden in as starter, over Ed Johnson, who’s played pretty darned well, IMO, so it’s not that they’re not searching for some spark. That encourages me that maybe they’ll see that Hardy is outperforming Brayton.
Maybe they’ll try this, too. God knows the same ol’, same ol’ isn’t working, and I’ve showed something that has, albeit in limited time. It’s an idea.
Damn BigD you seem hostile right now lol
Clausen is a rookie dude, he is supposed to suck. dang
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
Just to throw this little bit of info in here.
Clausen actually managed to do pretty well in the hurry up at the end of the tampa bay game. So he’s not as incompetent as you imply.
by Flowing Willow on Nov 3, 2010 8:48 PM EDT up reply actions
late to the discussion i guess,...
but i agree that fox/davidson gets in the way.
last year, the times that jake was productive was when the hurry up offense was on the move. same this year. calls get out too late and are too heavily scripted and too predictable. trick plays we try and pull don’t work. no one is ever fooled. there are no fakes that work. the only way this offense works is if they just keep pounding away without giving the other team a chance to breathe. i don’t care if it’s running the ball pr passing it down the field. just be relentless in it. as weak as the passing game has been, it’s still more successful than the run and being persistent in the passing game is the only thing that will open up the run game.
fox just likes having things more controlled. he doesn’t like an aggressive gameplan, esp.an aggressive passing game. i can’t wait until we move beyond him and into the modern world of football.
Right on, brother.
Moore and the hurry-up has given us a taste of what it COULD be like.
It seems that our run game is battering itself, week after week, into a brick wall, to easily defensed by every team we face.
Peyton's pre/post-snap reads are why this works
4-wide and 1 RB – How many in the box? Check to run? Where is the pressure likely to come from?
Throw slant to space emptied by blitzer? (This bit him in the SB….)
Hitch and go deep.
Post-snap read has not been Moore’s strongest point yet.
Then he must have some other compensatory mechanism, for his success is documentable.
Or maybe he just doesn’t spend so much time filming commercials about himself, calling audibles. :-)
The Colts tend to go with 3 wide, 1 TE and a RB.
But yes, the reason it works is because like Brees, Manning seems to know what’s coming.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
I DON'T BELIEVE IT!!!
At last, we Panther fans, or at least most of us, can see that this team needs to run a shotgun, hurry-up offense with the talent we have.
Moore is my second choice to give this a go, if not my first choice. I’d like to see Moore/Edwards both get a shot at it. Again I’m throwing Edwards into the mix because of his ability to roll out and pass or run depending on what he sees – - – and he’s had 3 college years of experience at running such an offense.
As far as the Moore/Clausen debate I think Matt is twice the QB that Pickles will EVER hope to be.
Jim
I don't agree totally.
There are teams that can pass all day…til the cows come home: Houston, San Diego, New Orleans, etc, that are struggling. At some point, if you want to win a game that matters, you are going to need some balance. You’ll have to lineup and smash some bitches at some point down the road. Its not a coincidence that New Orleans lead the league in passing for several years, but finished with a losing or a .500 record until they found a running game (or decided to use one). They finished 6th in the league in rushing last season, took some pressure off of Brees, and won the whole f’n thing (Major League reference).
And its too early to tell on Clausen. He looked okay to me, just a few too many balls at the feet of receivers, and too many balls batted at the line.
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
by ERL on Nov 2, 2010 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions
The Saints running game works because everyone sells out to stop the pass.
It’s a smart way of picking up yards, but that team lives and dies by Brees’ ability to move the football.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
This quote should be documents in CSR history
“You’ll have to line up and smash some bitches at some point”
Unofficial Agent for Armanti Edwards, WR #10, Carolina Panthers
Solution
Moore/Clausen/whoever is at QB needs to learn to stand tall and go through their progressions. THAT is their problem in addition to numerous errant throws by moore, and tiny hands in the case of clausen
that doesn't solve
the o-line not being able to block thing we’ve had going on
Let's see
Moore had numerous plays where he got loads of time and did no better. Yes the line is blocking for shit on running plays. But that happens when the defense is blitzing lb’s and safeties all game because we don’t have a passing game. He should be using checkdowns etc. Good qb’s get rid of the ball quickly. Case in point drew brees. His Oline this year is Attrocious in pass protection. I’m sorry guys but our problem is predictable play calling and QB. Everyone told us we were screwed because Matt wasn’t an NFL QB but we all fooled ourselves with 5 games last season and are trying to make excuses for him.
We still NEED to find a QB.
And we still NEED to find coaches.
Other than that we are set. (Might wanna find a replacement for otah since he is always injured)
i'll give on some of your points
predictable play calling and new coaches, still not sold on new qb, as we’ve been (in both cases)- plugging in square pegs into round holes, that start with scheme
Some of us weren't fooled.
Brees, Manning and Brady make their O-lines look better than they are because a) they have an intimate knowledge of their playbook, b) they have an excellent grasp of the defence’s tendencies and c) they go through their progressions ridiculously quickly.
There’s a reason they’re head and shoulders above everyone else.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
Agree with the prevent defense
jai6yy is right. I apologize in advance if this is redundant. I didn’t have time to read all the post. It is easier to look like a hero when the defense is playing prevent. There are some advantages to the offense in a hurry up situation which could benefit Moore (or any quarterback). I obviously don’t have the ability to study game film but from my observations, the type of defense that is being played is main reason for his success in the “hurry up”.
I don't think its the main reason. Teams don't all play "prevent" in those situations.
Many coaches refer to the prevent defense as something that “prevents you from winning,” and therefore don’t use it.
I think rhythm has as much to do with it as anything else. The other inherent advantage offensively is the defense usually cannot substitute between plays. So if the offense spreads it out, you’ll have LBs playing in space which is obviously a favorable match-up in most cases.
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
by ERL on Nov 2, 2010 4:44 PM EDT up reply actions
Partially Agree
It may not be the old “prevent” that I played but the coverage in those situations is designed to keep everything in front of the defense at the expense of giving up the shorter completions. Obviously each situation is different. How many scores you are ahead, how much time is left, down and distance etc. I agree that the hurry up can benefit an offense and qb for all the reasons you listed. And it may help Moore. It certainly can’t be much worse. I just felt from my observations that the times I have seen him in the hurry up have been when the defense were situations where the defenses were playing a little softer.
It is a factor, yes.
But I’m not sure all the credit for Moore’s hurry-up success can be given to prevent defenses. It was described above as ‘the main reason’ Moore is having more success in the hurry-up.
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
by ERL on Nov 2, 2010 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions
It wasn't described by me that way.
It’s the speed with which he executes the play – 15.5 seconds on average, to run the play. Not using the 45 seconds is key.
If I stand there in front of you for 45 seconds, before I hit you, you may be prepared to fend off the blow; but if I just haul off and whack you, you might be caught relatively off-guard. Do that over and over again, and you’re on your back foot, not reacting as fast. Same thing here.
And before one argues whether that’s the case, it seems to be with Moore, from his results.
Those mismatches rarely happen.
If the offence makes a substitution, the defence is allowed to make a substitution – the officials will stand over the ball whilst the defensive players are coming onto the field to prevent the C from snapping it.
If the offence spreads out it’s still LBs on RBs, or CBs on WRs – whatever the match ups were before the no-huddle came into effect. Unless the defensive co-ordinator has made a serious error in judgement of course. Then they almost certainly would call a time out.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
As such a mistake would only happen once, unless the defensive co-ordinator wants to get fired...
I’m going to say one.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
Read all the post, then.
It’s only redundant in that it isn’t cognizant of all the facts I’ve presented.
Just to say, “it won’t work” is against all the American way of life, and the inherent abilities of our great and noble countrymen to break new ground, and try new ideas, and not accept “No, it can’t work” for an answer. This is election day, sir, and you are bordering on being unpatriotic. LOL
I have studied all the game film I can stomach on the Panthers, and I’m offering a solution, not just re-stating the problem. (and no, Moore’s not the problem, but he could be part of the solution.)
The coaches need to stop coaching the 2008 Carolina Panthers
Hurry-up or shotgun dink-and-dunk plays are desperately needed. Our coaches refuse to admit that they don’t have the 2008 roster and continue to run plays that do not work with our personnel. That is not a winning strategy.
+1
we have had the same gameplan for 3 years. They REFUSE to adjust
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
Okay the negative attitudes have got to go.
Seriously, I have no problem debating rancorously with one another. In fact, I’m not only a supporter of it but a contributor to them. However, when things start bubbling over and people take these arguments personally, it’s time to take a step back because the type of comments those lead to really have no place here.
I’m all for openly (and even bluntly) disagreeing with someone, but there’s no need to demean what they say by referring to them as apart of the coaching staff or sarcastically referring to them as a genius.
Stemming the tide a little bit here, hopefully…
In between searching for a life, job, and place so that I can move out of my parents basement..
I found time to rec this post. I’m all for giving it a shot. I’d love to see if Moore could be successful throughout a whole game. Can’t love it or knock it ‘til it’s proven to be effective or ineffective for 60 minutes. No reason to not give it a go, unless we’re afraid of trying something risky because we might end up 1-7…. Something risky might be the only thing that can keep us from 1-7.
The Carolina Panthers are the best team in the NFL, except on Sundays.
I love you, D-Ranged!
That made me smile a big smile. And not for the Rec.
(Tip of the hat to you.)
LOL that's great D-Ranged
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
BigD, something I seriously want you to consider...
Sure, Matt Moore may perform better under these specific situations, but the reason I brought up the fact that you threw out the plays you “didn’t like” (specifically the turnovers to be honest) is because those plays still happened under this offense during those situations. Therefore, those plays are still just as likely to continue happening if this situation is dragged out throughout the entire game. You can’t merely look at Matt Moore in a vacuum and try to spread his play and his play alone in these situations throughout the entire game. You would have to do the same for the entire offensive unit as a whole. An offensive unit as a whole that gave up INTs, allowed sacks, and surrendered a fumble.
That’s why I believe that your premise to this argument is logically flawed and therefore can’t be replicated. It is an attempt to put Moore in the best situation possible, but as we all know Moore isn’t the sole problem with this offense.
That’s why I don’t think this setup will work.
The "best situation possible" is what all fans want, isn't it?
I’m attempting to point out that the hurry-up game is when Moore shines. He doesn’t in regular time, because then all the other weaknesses that the Panthers have this year come into play: the unimaginative, predictable, easily defensible play-calling from the OC; the inability of the OL to maintain blocks in pass-protection, when he’s in 3rd and long, because of the play-calling that got us there; the equally ineffective running game we no longer have. Hell, for no explainable reason, even the dropped passes are fewer, per pass attempted, in hurry up.
His turnovers are fewer by far in the hurry up, too. Why? Because he plays better in a pressure situation, not worse, as several have surmised. Just because he said in an interview that he felt “pressure” in the early games of the season, it’s now become attached to him. like he’s some choker. But if he were, you think he could produce like the numbers listed above, during crunch time? Hell, no. He was just saying the right thing, probably just answering, “Sure” to some leading question aimed at him by Gantt, or some other writer. Then they run with it, because there’s nothing else to write.
Again, I’m not making this shit up. It’s not just a theory of mine. The proof is there, if you take off your blinders. Look at the GD numbers! 26/34, and 4 scores, in 10 minutes!!
Turnovers?
The sack/fumble in Game 1 was due to a blind-side hit because Gross blew.
The INT in Game 5 was a Hail Mary, uncontested by his WR.
The earlier INT that game wasn’t in hurry up, but was a freak bounce off Edwards hands, and knee.
The INT is Game 7 was considered to be Smith’s fault, as much as Moore’s
All other turnovers counted against Moore didn’t come in hurry up, and only prove my point better. That is, he’s better in shot-gun, hurry up.
I also wouldn't mind seeing something like this tried but not for every series....
primarily because I would be worried about TOP and potentially running our own defense into the ground and secondly I think it would keep the oppossing defenses even more off balanced if it were mixed in. Right now IMO our biggest problem is production on 1st & 2nd down, so maybe this might help keep the oppossing corners off the line a little bit and open up some quick hitting short passes to compensate for our lack of push in the run game..
I see that objection, and I'll raise you this one.
If it worked, it could stake us to an early lead, for a change, and change the whole complexion of the game.
As I said earlier, we could then kill clock with runs, as we used to, in days gone by. Then our D would get its well-deserved rest.
Besides, even if this idea worked to perfection, most drives would take 4 minutes or so, if we had to go 70-80 yds, which is a whole lot longer than all those 3and outs our offense is throwing out there now. We’ve averaged maybe 11-12 drives a game so far – even 3 minute TOPs would give us an advantage. It’s when we’re always wearing Jason Baker’s leg out, that the defense gets bushed.
One final thought...
When you make a theory before you have all the information, you inevitability will twist facts to suit theories instead of theories to suit facts. I believe this is the case here based on the following quote:
I’m tired of Moore getting toasted for failures that aren’t of his making.
It may be one of the last things he mentions, but I would be mildly surprised if it weren’t one of the first on his mind when he started this endeavor.
Not at all. And that's my final thought to you.
I was remembering the 0:33 drill he ran in the Giants game, and it came to as I watched him close out the last 2 games. Thought I’d see what the real numbers were, from such circumstances. I was surprised, actually, that there was so obviously a disconnect from the ‘regular’ series he ran.
I figured if it were so glaring a difference, it must mean something. Then I reasoned why that might be. The rest has come out in discussion, including the article from TMQ, discussing how rare it is for any hurry up offense to average 15 seconds per play. Not mush discussion has arisen from that factoid, but I think it’s quite important. It shows he really IS hurrying up, and it shows in the results.
If you or anybody else chooses to ignore it, or discount it, for any reasons you can think of, I could care less, and I’m tired of trying to convince you of its scientific validity. It is a statistical fact, and I sent it to Sorenson, in the hope that he can show it to the staff, and it might be implemented with an improvement tot he team.
I twisted no facts, but laid them all out,. and I resent you think I’d do so. I now challenge you to prove where a fact is wrong. The fact that I’ve always admired Moore’s play in no way clouded my statement of the facts and figures.
Part of the reason I said that about Moore’s being ‘toasted’ is that I’ve mistakenly read the Open Game Threads (which I won’t again, for they’re filled with stupidity and outright hate, and Moore is a large target for those low lifes, who, thankfully, post little during the week, when their vulgar venom is not accepted. The comment was external to the discussion of the facts I discovered.
If you're wondering why half the comments are missing... it's because they are hidden
Guys… seriously now… I feel like Chris Carter but ’C’MON MAN!’
The amount of personal attacks from all sides in these comments were absolutely, completely, irrefutably out of control!
I know temperatures are high, and I feel everyone’s frustration- but these hot button topics (Moore v. Clausen, Armanti Edwards etc.) are spiraling out of control every single time they’re mentioned.
I’m not going to go through and flag every comment, or warn everyone individually but y’all know when you crossed the line tonight. Consider this a warning and I’ll close with an excerpt from the code of conduct… seems appropriate tonight:
Persons who post derogatory comments solely to incite anger will be considered ‘trolls’ and will be banned, with or without prior warning. Attempts to circumvent this code of conduct with language or tone intent on creating discord i.e. excessive sarcasm, mocking other members etc. will be considered akin to ‘trolling’ and will result in a warning giving the poster an opportunity to address their tone prior to any permanent moderation.
Guys… it’s not that tough. Imagine there’s not a computer screen in front of you and we’re all around a round table having a discussion. Would you say some of the things you’re posting? Internet anonymity has the opportunity to both bring people together to discuss a common topic, but also tear a group of people apart.
Let’s not let it get to this point again.
Follow me on Twitter! @James_Dator
by James Dator on Nov 2, 2010 8:37 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
I'm sure I have stuff to apologize for
Although I can’t remember atm since I got angry and went to the bar and am now shwasted =D
er.... That was a fail post lol
What I mean to say is I do apologize for too =D
I don't recall the context, but this link was 'hidden' within a rancorous post of mine.
It has validity, though, and want it to be part of my reasoning on the subject:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/101012_tuesday_morning_quarterback&sportCat=nfl
Specifically, this excerpt:
“Oregon is not the only college team to be snapping really fast. Two weeks ago, yours truly watched Amherst, an elite academic college, run a version of the blur, snapping in an average of 18 seconds; Amherst is undefeated and averaging 40 points a game. But 15 seconds ’til the snap — the actual average being posted by the Ducks, not a boast — is unprecedented.”
As Moore averages 15.5 seconds for each play he runs in the hurry up, I thought that was relevant – and startling.
Wow...
That was indeed about as aggressive as I’ve seen here at CSR. I can really appreciate the fire you guys show for this team. While it may have been a little out-of-bounds at times, I enjoyed the read. Glad to see people really care about this team, regardless of your various opinions. It was kinda like a football practice, really; yeah, these guys out here are your brothers, but sometimes they drive you completely insane, and the two of you have to go at it for a bit. It’s healthy; good, strong competition. All conflict is not negative.
"You know you're in Charlotte when every day while you're having lunch in the city you hear ... "GOD Scott Fowler is a retard!"
by The Kackalack Kid on Nov 2, 2010 8:49 PM EDT reply actions
Seeing as BigD was man enough to step up and apologize, though,
Seems like some others should follow that lead, no?
"You know you're in Charlotte when every day while you're having lunch in the city you hear ... "GOD Scott Fowler is a retard!"
by The Kackalack Kid on Nov 2, 2010 8:54 PM EDT up reply actions
Very good thread
I honestly never really thought about it until reading these comments, but Moore really does have a strong command of the no huddle offense. His decisions are super quick, he always gets his team in formation with plenty of time to tweak the play with pre-snap reads & audibles, and, as the aforementioned stats point out, he is efficient.
For the record, I’m on board with running the no huddle for game situations that call for it. Not the entire game, but if Moore sees an opportunity to catch the defense off guard, maybe he can give some sort of signal to the sidelines to put a temporary freeze on substitutions, and floor the gas pedal.
One last note – I avoided this past Sunday’s thread altogether. Mainly because I had my 3 boys with me, and, well…I was already locked into the game; I didn’t want to completely neglect them by participating in a thread on top of being glued to the TV. The other reason I didn’t chime in, not once, is because of something mentioned here. The negativity on game threads when our team is going through a rough patch sometimes is such a downer, that I’d rather just enjoy the game on my own merit. I can only imagine what was said after Moore’s very 1st pass attempt.
However, I enjoyed the game for the most part, as our defense was as solid as they’ve ever been, Goodson was still threatening to break one at every KO return, and I personally thought Moore made more good decisions than bad ones. It’s hard to keep my glass half full when every other passerby tries to either spit in it or knock it over.
The game threads are fun; don’t get me wrong. If it’s just me this Sunday, I’ll be checking in as usual.
Thank you, San Francisco!
Clausen
Can someone please make a post explaining why clausen should start and why Moore is not the answer
As soon as someone can come up with a logical reason backed up with facts, then yes.
Until then, sorry — you’re just out of luck.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
I could do it...
But it wouldn’t mean anything and the argument isn’t sound enough to support the switch.
But that’s probably indicative of why I haven’t done it.
Exactly.
You can’t logically argue that Clausen should start over Moore based on game performance this season. The only way you can support the switch is the “we have no chance to win this year” argument, and we’re technically not eliminated yet. But, once we hit that 9th loss (probably in 3 weeks), making a move would make logical sense.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
Um...
I think we are safely eliminated at this point. We have less than a 0.001% chance of making the play offs at this point. Sure, once we hit loss 9 that’s when it becomes official, but any belief that we have any hope is just kinda blind faith.
Basically, we would have to run the tables to make it to 10-6 AND have all the other teams that are currently ahead of us lose between 3 and 4 games.
I think we agree that we're most likely eliminated...
But it’s not official yet, so they have to go with the “gives us the best chance to win” argument until it is official.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
That's gay
But I guess they can’t come out and say " hey I’m John Fox, and I’m Jeff Davidson, AND WE’RE INCOMPETENT!!!"
so best chance to win and , excecution…. grand
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
Didn't know that an idea or a phrase could be homosexual...
But thanks for pointing that out Steven.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
Homosexual phrase....
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
LOL thanks for the visual aid
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
Tried to find something...
with Jay and Silent Bob but I couldn’t. That would have been better.
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
yeah, it would have...
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
how else would you desribe a fanny pack?
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
Ok you got me there. I concede. LOL
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
That's a Nick Swardson joke
wish I could take the credit
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
I know. I love Nick Swardson (no homo).
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
I can say I believe Clausen has more potienal than Moore and his play this season is the product of being a rookie and the other talent around him… Can’t say the same about Moore because he has been in this offense for 3 years, he WAS a 3rd string QB that really didn’t earn the job in practice last year but was given the job due to injury and the only reason he played well was because teams didn’t game plan agianst him and he had no pressure to preform… End of Arguement.. There is a reason he was a 3rd string QB in this league and he wasn’t really that good in college so you can’t say that. I mean whatelse can you guys base your starting Moore arguement on except his last year perform in garbage time of the season.. and don’t be like “well no one said anything about last year” because whether you say it or not his last year performance is the basis of all the Moore should start arguements and I really didnt see non of you crying for Moore last year before he was handed the starting job
You must not have been around last year then...
Because there were thousands of cries into the dead air of the night for Moore to replace Jake last year, and most of them started as soon as the clock hit 0:00 after we were obliterated by Philadelphia in Game 1 of the season.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
yeah right
I was here last year and most of them calls were for vinny testevardy, the McCown guy or Hunter Cantwell… Im not going to say no one but MOST of you were not calling for Matt Moore… I just don’t see why you guys think he is so good
It's not 'he is so good'
He’s the best option we currently have at the moment. When your choices are a 4 yr veteran and two rookies, it’s really not that hard of a choice to make.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
Not to add fuel to the flames
But he’s still not a very good option. The fact that we can even have this discussion (and for there to be some amount of rational sense to it) about a rookie QB taking over for a 4 year vet is a pretty sad place to be in…
Unless that rookie’s name is Matt Ryan.
I'm not saying he is a good option.
But he’s the best we have right now.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
best we have if...
we are trying to make the PLAYOFFS!?!?!?!?!??!?
ha huh PLAYOFFS?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?? You kiddin me? PLAYOFFS?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
Moore would give us a better chance at the playoffs than Clausen would
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
PLAYOFFS!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
LOL Thank you! I needed a laugh.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
I have been cracking up since the thought entered my mind lol
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
Yeah your right its not hard when you have a career backup in Moore and a top 10 talent that slipped in the draft because he had attitude problems… Clausen should clearly start because he needs the expierence so he can be better in the future
Its about winning games.....right now.
Did you notice how when Moore came back in the team looked like they believed they could actually win a game?
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
"whatelse can you guys base your starting Moore arguement "
If you read your own post, all YOU are basing your NO starting job argument on is the tired old arguement (sic) that he was 3rd string the year before, and didn’t really earn it in practice.
That needs updating.
Most QBs look better in the no huddle offence.
It simplifies the defences they see – the defensive co-ordinator can’t get his play call to the MLB in time, resulting in the D going into vanilla coverages.
It takes a special QB to run that all game. We don’t have one.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
Well now, that shows your bias against Moore, right there.
You’re always one of the most vociferous haters of Moore on the Open Game Threads, and one of the reasons I won’t read them any more.
I can’t believe you read the details of the post I made above, or you wouldn’t say he’s not special enough.
And your statement that the DC can’t get his own play call in to his MLB in time just proves my contention that it would work all the time – for the very reason you yourself stated. Thanks for your help. I hadn’t expected that kind of backup from you. What a guy!
Ok, firstly, yes I think Matt Moore is a terrible QB.
I like to think I don’t ruin game threads with my opinion though, but whatever.
As for the second part. I seriously doubt Moore can call his own plays for half the game. He’s not that kind of QB.
Perhaps he can run a two minute drill relatively effectively for two minutes, when the plays are scripted. Asking him to do that for 30 minutes though is beyond his capabilities. He’s simply not that in control of the offence.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
Dude.... Lets be Real
The panthers are not going to run the no huddle offense because they don’t have the faith in Moore to do so…You act like your little article on Moore and a few useless stats is the end all be all of the Matt Moore debate.. Well its not until Matt Moore can consistanly pull together good games wins I won’t even consider your arguement and even if he does then I still won’t believe Moore is a good QB until next year when the pressure is back on him to perform and then I will judge… But until then none of the little garbage time statistics you put up really matters… Here is a suggestion how about you put up statistics for Moore when the Game could still be won and then I MIGHT listen to your arguement but until Moore can get consistant with his game then I won’t because it doesn’t matter what the offensive ordinator calls it is his job to execute the plays and if the plays are so bad then why won’t he as the signal caller audible out of the play… I believe he has at least this ability.. But the only think he has been consistant lately at is throwing INTS
by DT3428 on Nov 3, 2010 9:15 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
So let me get this straight...
You’re going to ignore the fact that we have no running game, no offensive line, rookie receivers, and an offensive coordinator who couldn’t playcall himself out of a paper bag, yet you’re going to go with Moore being the sole reason for the offensive struggles this year?
Big Davis has provided facts in this article that show Matt Moore is an effective QB in the no-huddle offense, and is providing a suggestion that perhaps the team should try and do this during the course of the game to improve the offensive production (pun intended).
Matt Moore isn’t Peyton Manning, he isn’t Drew Brees, and he isn’t Tom Brady. But, he’s the best we’ve got (at the moment), and honestly until we get some help on the offensive line, it’s really not going to matter who’s under center, because they’re going to struggle with only 2 seconds to throw the football.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
This makes every discussion from here on out pointless.
until we get some help on the offensive line, it’s really not going to matter who’s under center, because they’re going to struggle
Because it’s true. Moore is a part of a problem (that problem being a terrible offense), but he is not the only part.
As soon as you prove it, with factual information that he does, I will.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
And compare them to Clausen's stats.
The QB isn’t the source of the problem, no matter how obstinate you want to be about it. It’s the piss-poor play of the OL, and the shitty play-calling of our coaches.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
And Moore is starting his first full season at QB.
You really don’t get it do you? You can go with the “he’s been the 3rd string guy for 3 years” all you want, but this is his first year of being “the” starting QB.
I love how you use “that’s all” to end your statements. It proves that you absolutely have no idea what you’re talking about, so you use a definitive phrase to try and make your point valid. Too bad it doesn’t work.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
+1
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
What are you 12 freaking years old??
First you come in here and belittle someone who has done actual statistics based research to back his opinions, and try to belittle that.
Then you take a middle school stance to prove you are right by saying
Moore sucks just admit it
Then you further degrade into saying one thing then putting your fingers in your ears like its the end all be all of discussion on the subject
Look at his season stats… thats all
Clausen is a rookie thats all
Until you can approach this subject like an adult, you should take a breather from this blog.
Unofficial Agent for Armanti Edwards, WR #10, Carolina Panthers
Ok
So you are insulting me now calling me a child because I can express my opinion and it pisses you off a little bit… Have you read anything else I have said… You didn’t highlight the posts were I went into detail about my thoughts because you can’t argue it instead you call me a child like your a football coach or something I garantee your football IQ is lower than mine and you might need to take a breather from this… listen to what you guys say but what you are saying and all of these stats about what he does in the no huddle don’t matter because teams only run the no huddle when they are down or when there is a two minute warning. Defense don’t play up on the line of scrimmage when their team is up late in the 4th. They back off and play soft zones over the top to prevent the big play.. All Moore has to do is dump it down under the defenses zone and let the recievers run thats why I seem to ignore some of what you guys say because its pointless to try and prove Moore is a good QB when the game is over.. There is nothing to argue
listen to what you guys say but what you are saying and all of these stats about what he does in the no huddle don’t matter because teams only run the no huddle when they are down or when there is a two minute warning
If you would actually take the time to COMPREHEND what’s being said, you would understand that the point Big Davis is trying to make in this article is that we should run the no-huddle all the time (or most of the time) to help compensate for some of the failures on offense.
I garantee [sic] your football IQ is lower than mine
Based on the posts and comments that Tater has made vs. the posts and comments that you have made, I highly doubt this is fact. Tater is one of the most intelligent and even-keeled posters we have on this site, so I wouldn’t say that your football IQ is higher than his, especially when you use “Clausen is a rookie thats all” as one of your arguments.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
thanks for your kind words bw, I appreciate it.
Unofficial Agent for Armanti Edwards, WR #10, Carolina Panthers
no prob
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
No, I'm calling the way you belitte other people's arguments childish, and then the way you go on to act like your own are so superior that it is "the end of discussion" as immature.
And you did it in 3 separate occasions. I have read some of your other posts, and I chose not to comment on them because you weren’t talking down to anyone.
In the ones I highlight above, you are clearly taking an immature stance of trying to put your opinion on a topic higher than anyone elses.
No one appreciates having their article, which they spent a decent amount of time on, being called their “little” argument in the same way a mother comments to her friends when they see a toddler in a a pumpkin suit. You know the context I’m talking about… “Aw, look at his little pumpkin outfit and little pumpkin hat. Isn’t it cute?” is the EXACT same thing you convey when you say it is someones “little” argument and they are showing their “little garbage time statistics.”
You are free to express your opinion, as BigD is free to express his. What you are NOT free to do is insult someones work by calling it insignificant. All opinions are significant, all opinions are helpful in their own way as they add to the collective knowledge of the whole, look how much thought and debate BigD has inspired by posting his opinions… 250 comments and counting! We become educated by learning about the observations and thoughts of others, not by blindly insisting upon our own.
“Sir, I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it” —Voltaire
… Is a mantra that everyone should live by in all walks of life, especially when we are talking about people who are ULTIMATELY ALL ON THE SAME SIDE as panther fans are.
Unofficial Agent for Armanti Edwards, WR #10, Carolina Panthers
And, those 250+ comments aren’t even counting the ones that were moderated last night for getting too out of control.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
Haha. At least 10 of those were mine, I bet.
Got a little over-heated there.
Are you his dad or something
His opinions are important but I am debating whether his stats are important. I am not belittling any of his stats or research but I am questioning whether what he is saying is significant. What he says maybe important when there is two minutes left in the game and we are down by 20 but are they significant now maybe not. What his the chance the Panthers are going to start running the No-Huddle Offense for the whole game? Slim? You guys are obviously Moore supports but that doesn’t mean you “Tater” has to come and defend them agianst my arguements. Why? won’t you argue any of my points. All you have done is call me a child and insult my intelligence. You are not there father.
This is exactly what I'm talking about
My point is that you’re being rude and immature in the way you are addressing peoples opinions in general. It has nothing to do with BigD or anyone else, it has to do with the general way people should talk to one another.
My intention is not to insult you, but to make you aware that your general tone is not appreciated and you may not have realized it. You directly told him that his opinion does not matter above, which is something no one should do.
Unofficial Agent for Armanti Edwards, WR #10, Carolina Panthers
Agian...
I DIDN’T say his opinions were not important but I said that I don’t believe his STATS are signficant in his arguement…. Matter of fact I said it in my first sentence and clearly stated “His opinions are important but I am debating whether his stats are important.” and when I say he I am refering to his arguement about how his stats prove his opinion is true. If BigD or Smith or anyone else has a problem with me debating there opinions and stats then they need to address me with there arguements. Not some 3rd party that comes in and trys to defend them like they are defenseless. BigD can defend himself with his arguements to prove me wrong. I may say things like Matt Moore “sucks” or whatever but at the same time I never called anyone one name or insult. Like yourself Tater596 did by essentially calling me “immature” and a “kid” because I am aggressively trying to argue there point. But you continue to act as if I insulted the man’s intelligence, or call him names like you did me. So obviously someone else (YOU) may really be the child up here by essentially insulting me but you still haven’t tryed once to argue my points about Moore, instead you are to busy passing on insults and trying to defend you fellow Matt Moore supporters
If BigD or Smith or anyone else has a problem with me debating there [sic] opinions and stats then they need to address me with there arguements. [sic]
Please tell me how many times you would like for me to address your inaccuracies with my own points, because I know I’ve done it at least twice. Is there a number of times I must do it before you acknowledge it? If so, what’s that number?
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
I'm tired of going in circles with this
If you’ll notice in the comments farther down the page you’ll notice I have addressed multiple things you have said about Moore.
My problem is your use of the word “little” in both of these cases.
You act like your little article on Moore and a few useless stats is the end all be all of the Matt Moore debate
But until then none of the little garbage time statistics you put up really matters
Do you not see how that can be considered degrading to someone? Or how it can come off as rude? Then take the dismissive ones that I have already quoted above, and of course it seems like you are making an immature argument!
I’m not trying to defend anyone, I’m trying to defend a climate of open ideas on this blog where one person can express their opinions and others can offer their own in kind, and in a civilized manner. It is important to me, and has been important to most of the members of this blog for quite some time now.
One thing is clear to me though, and we should probably end this here before the whole thread gets locked. You thought you were communicating in a way that was not offensive, I thought you were. If your true intention was not to belittle his work, then all I ask is for you to choose your words more carefully next time.
So I extend this Olive Branch as a token of let’s just move on…
..because kids in pumpkin suits really are cute, but…
… Jimmy as a Teletubby is not.
Unofficial Agent for Armanti Edwards, WR #10, Carolina Panthers
This would have been the perfect time...
For another one of those Top Cats photos that you have stashed away for special occasions.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
I gotta admit... that was by far the best one I had
You’re not going to find a better concentration of Top Cat Tailbone in one picture at such good resolution.
I can offer you this however….
These are the two cheerleaders that got busted for having sex with each other in a club bathroom. Let your mind run with that one for awhile…
Unofficial Agent for Armanti Edwards, WR #10, Carolina Panthers
augghhhh ya gotta be kiddin!
That one on the right is nice with it. the one on the left is busted but I’d do the 2fer
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
by ERL on Nov 3, 2010 3:05 PM EDT up reply actions
There are those of us that believe he's not the best we've got at the moment, and he's definitely
not our best option for the future.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
garbage time
The only time we run the no huddle is no garbage time… Any QB can look good when the defense is trying to prevent the big play down the field and giving up short completions… and I will keep saying to my face isn’t brown no more that we have no running game because no one fears our passing game… All you got to do is stack the box and double smith and you shut down the panthers offense.. It is moores job to see that and adjust and throw the big play to the other receivers deep something he hasn’t done. Also it doesn’t matter what play is called it is his job to execute it as the field general, i mean he can call a audible if he doesn’t like the play right? Again stop making excuses
personally
this logic is sound.
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
dont shoot!
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
Lol....
I know how you feel.
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
No, it's not sound logic at all.
All the situational aspects that DT3428 listed apply to the regular game sets that Moore or any QB faces with the Panthers.
The hurry up offensive drives he’s led this year haven’t been “garbage time.”
That’s a commonly repeated misconception, akin to the “prevent defense” talk that gets cliched about here.
I’m going to the chalkboard. Follow closely:
When we put Fiammetta in front of Williams/Stewart behind Moore, who’s under center, and we flank 2 WRs, and bunch our TEs, that’s when we see 8 guys in the box, because they KNOW we’re gonna run. And them, surprise! – we do. Result: no gain, a TFL, or a 1-2 yd gain, if we’re lucky. On a rare occasion. D-Will will break one outside on a cut back, and we pick up 7-15. Familiar?
Now. In hurry up, we go to 4WRs, with Goodson the lone setback, Moore in shotgun. Ha-ha. Eureka. No more 8 in the box. If anybody can’t grasp that, subtract 8 from 11, and tell me who’s defending that 4th WR.
That’s the advantage I’m seeking, and what our OC should be seeking, if he knew anything at all about how to beat a defense that’s stifling the hell out of his usual attack style. But he doesn’t. He’s a head-beater.
When we’re in that 4WR set, with a lone back (who, BTW is very good at picking up blitzers) and Moore in the gun, where he can scan the field quicker, we have a tremendous advantage! And that’s what Moore’s been able to exploit, as the stats above show, that he CAN’T exploit when he’s UC, with a non-blocking FB, and an alignment that just screams at the defense, stack ‘em, we don’t care, we’re running any way.
(Putting down the chalk.)
Now that’s sound logic. Anybody can’t grasp that oughta watch more basketball. Fewer players to have to account for.
I agree
Although I have to say…. Why do we need to be in hurry up to do 3 and 4 WR sets?
Maybe that's the answer, then.
When we put the QB UC, with 2 I-backs, and 2 TEs on the line, we should expect nothing less than having to face 8 in the box.
Maybe it’s just as simple as running out of passing sets, and passing out of running alignments.
Whatever, it ain’t working, doing the same thing every game.
Personally without Hoover
I do not want to see power I more than a couple times a game…. Which won’t happen with fox
I really like this
And one of the 4WRs could be Rosario who could motion into the backfield to act as a FB. And line Steve up on the same side as Gettis. That would really open things up for Gettis. With Rosario on the other side, that would probably force a nickle back to cover Rosario – that’s a matchup I’ll take every time.
by The Duke Dude on Nov 3, 2010 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions
Adjustments
Who says Moore is going to be able to read the field?
Who says the defense is not going to be able to adjust to this?
I will admit it MAY work once.
But agian if Matt Moore can’t find Smith wide open deep like he missed smith open last week mutiple times then again its not going to work. Even our oppenents acknowledge that the believe Moore can’t read defenses or has trouble reading them. See our Oppenents defensive strategy is this
1: Stack eight men in the box
2: Bracket cover smith with A safety over the top and a corner playing man coverage.
3: Man coverage any one else that does not have Smith on there jersey
4: Gap Disciple wih the outside line backers to stop anychance of a cut back.
5: Make Matt Moore beat you with him arm.
Essentially defenses are daring Matt Moore to beat him with his arm. Matt Moore has failed to utilized the second receiver deep, he is getting man coverage every play and Moore has yet to realize that. So I have come to the conclusion that there plan is flaud because it realizes to heavy on Moores abiltiy to read defenses which is questionable at this point. Your stats may show that he can but they don’t show that the defense was playing soft zones over the top letting receivers get open underneath. Which Moore does a good job of getting the ball to them but the recievers are really the ones that are make his stats look better than they really are. Also these stats came when the game was out of hand mostly. How about that Giants game where we had a chance to come back and we were in the red zone 3 times were he also failed? Those are the stats we need to be looking at.
2.You are failing to account for defensive adjustments. You suggest in your article that we run it all game. Logically defenses are going to adjust accordingly.Basically you want us to run the spread offense which any QB can be successful in. You might has well put Pike in there.
3. What will really open up the running game would be for Moore to start throwing to the 2nd Wide Reciever over the top and exploit the man coverage on the outside. Then you would see defenses stop stacking 8 and 9 men in the box.
Conclusion: I have already discussed this topic with a certified football coach and this is basically what he told me is wrong with the panthers offense. We have no need to run the spread/hurry up offense.. Moore just need to start exploiting more one on one coverage on the outside with gettis. last time I checked gettis runs like a 4.4 or 4.3 Forty so we need to expliot that… I would also like to add he did a nice job of doing VS San Fransico thats why Lafell and gettis was successful because he threw it to them even when the were covered 1 on 1. Playing is not the problem for the most part .. we have seem what we run works its just up to Moore to execute it
Moore just need to start exploiting more one on one coverage on the outside with gettis.
This would work great, if the OL gave Moore time in the pocket for the route to develop and Gettis to get open.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
Don't do that
That act like the offense line is that bad because they aren’t Moore has a enough time on MOST plays not all to find someone in one on one coverage
You cannot be serious.
Have you even watched a game? There is no way you can say that the OL gives Moore, Clausen, or anyone else who lines up under center enough time to find an open receiver. Hell, they can’t even open up a hole big enough for D-Will and J-Stew to eek out a 3 yard gain, much less give the QB adequate time to find a receiver open down field.
Moore has enough time to find someone open in one on one coverage maybe 5% of the time. It’s not his fault the OL can’t hold their blocks for more than 2 seconds.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
They can’t when there is 8 in the box because of Moores inabilty to pass… You guys act like Moore has David Carrs O Line.
It's not that bad, but it's pretty damn close.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
I'm just going to hit some highlights since you seem to want to goad me into this and your piece above is barely readable
Smitty didn’t do Matt any favors last week with his key dropped passes. Matt has a much better stat line if Smith doesn’t drop a few balls and then have a key fumble. We also would have been closer to winning the game if not winning it outright.
Again, Matt having trouble finding anyone deep is because the pressure is already in his face by the time someone is open deep.
Moore does a good job of getting the ball to them but the recievers are really the ones that are make his stats look better than they really are.
Safe to say that all Quarterbacks expect their receivers to help make their stats better. Not to mention of late our receivers have been doing the opposite by dropping passes or running bad routes that lead to INTs. It’s a double edged sword. Young and inexperienced WRs playing with a young and inexperienced QB.
Also these stats came when the game was out of hand mostly. How about that Giants game where we had a chance to come back and we were in the red zone 3 times were he also failed? Those are the stats we need to be looking at.
Only once has the game been “out of hand” when we sent Moore in. We had chances to win every other time. As to the Giants game, not only was the playcalling terrible, but there is a good chance that Matt was already suffering the effects of a concussion at that point.
The defense is going to constantly adjust throughout the game. How exactly are we to compensate for that statistically? So if our QB starts beating a defense with the pass, and they actually have to play the pass properly, do we have faith in our running game right now to win against 7 in the box? I haven’t seen any indication from our line that they could block under ideal conditions at this time.
I still don’t see a reason why we couldn’t incorporate more Hurry-Up offense into our game plan. We don’t need to be like Oregon and run it the whole game, but there is no reason that we couldn’t spontaneously go to a hurry up offense at different points in the game. The thing we lack most right now is diversity and creativity on offense. Things like the No-Huddle, the wildcat/Mountaineer, and running plays out of other non-traditional sets (passing out of run sets and vice versa) will give us that edge.
Unofficial Agent for Armanti Edwards, WR #10, Carolina Panthers
Please don't.
Why would it be so bad for us to give it a try? Probably won’t happen anyway but damn, why not give it a shot?
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
Damn, you're good.
That’s a summary that would’ve taken me 3 times the space to encapsulate.
Whatever man.
You know I don’t even feel like debating with you guys anymore. You people are so up tight about everything the debate doesn’t even matter to me anymore. Is it wrong to express my opinion without using correct grammar all the time. Last time I checked this isn’t a business meeting or something. I have just decided I am going to let you guys believe what you want to believe about Moore because if you believe a career backup QB is the answer then whatever. But I garantee you this, YOU WILL SEE CLAUSEN SOONER OR LATER starting this season. Moore is not going to be back next year so whats the point of playing him? That is a question you guys do not seem to understand. You guys not all of you are so wrapped up in your sometimes meaningless stats that you fail to apply some commen sense to your arguements. But its whatever I want to see where yall at when yall get called out this Saints game because Moore threw for 3 INTs 150 yards and 10/27 completion.
"Moore is not going to be back next year so whats the point of playing him?"
Uhh…to win football games. The singular objective of every football team on the face of the earth?
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
He's not better than Clausen right now.
Plus, winning an extra game this season is pointless.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
Tell that to Jon Fox
Pointless? So who’s your NFL team?
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
Is it wrong to express my opinion without using correct grammar all the time.
You need a question mark there, not a period. (I couldn’t resist.)
And no, it’s not wrong, but it makes it a hell of a lot easier to understand your argument when you use proper grammar and sentence structure.
I have just decided I am going to let you guys believe what you want to believe about Moore because if you believe a career backup QB is the answer then whatever.
Thank you, kind sir, for allowing me to believe what I want to believe. I am so glad you approve of me so much that you, in your infinite wisdom, will allow me to actually think for myself.
How do you know Moore is a career backup? He’s been in the league for 4 years and this is his first season starting out as the #1 QB. Give him a chance to fail before you label him a career backup.
But I garantee (sic) you this, YOU WILL SEE CLAUSEN SOONER OR LATER starting this season.
Pretty easy to make that guarantee, since Clausen has already started two games, but whatever.
Moore is not going to be back next year so whats the point of playing him? That is a question you guys do not seem to understand.
And here is an answer that you don’t seem to understand:
Matt Moore is the best QB that we have on the roster THIS season. You play to win the game. So, it only makes sense to play your best player at the most important position on the field to try and win the game. It’s really not that difficult to figure out.
Also, how do you know that Moore won’t be back next season? Have you personally asked him if he won’t re-sign, and did he emphatically tell you “Hell no, I’m not coming back here.”? Have you personally discussed with JR or Hurney whether or not they will offer him a contract, and if so, did they tell you they would not? Or, did your “certified football coach” tell you this information?
Fact: you, me, or anyone else on this blog don’t know shit when it pertains to what will happen in the future. That’s just the way it goes. You can’t say that he won’t be here next year, because like the rest of us, you have no idea if he will be or not.
But its whatever I want to see where yall at when yall get called out this Saints game because Moore threw for 3 INTs 150 yards and 10/27 completion.
I made a similar statement to Big Davis before the 49ers game, and Moore played his best game all season. I was man enough to admit I was wrong, so hopefully you will be also if Moore plays well and we either beat the Saints or lose for something other than QB play.* Though, based on your previous posts in this thread, I seriously doubt you will eat those words if he plays well.
*-And yes, QB play isn’t the sole cause for our 1-6 record. You keep blaming Moore, but you are forgetting a lot of other problems that we have, such as pitiful OL play, key drops and fumbles by receivers and running backs, and downright terrible play calling by the coaching staff. But you keep on beating Moore into the ground, because it will be fun to watch you lick your wounds when he proves you wrong.
I consider my part in this debate complete, as I am tired of wasting my time with an obstinate, ignorant to the facts Moore-hater who would rather see Moore fail just to justify his position than see the team win games.
Thanks for playing, you may collect your parting gift on the way out.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
by BW Smith on Nov 5, 2010 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Conclusion: I have already discussed this topic with a certified football coach and this is basically what he told me is wrong with the panthers offense.
Certified as in has a certificate, or certified as in belongs in an asylum?
Sorry, had to ask.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
Assumptions
See I said that I knew a coach and you assumed I go a school… What does me saying I know a coach have to do with the debate at hand.
You lose all credibility in a debate when you use unnamed sources without an ability to back them up
It shows you aren’t confident that your position can stand on its own. Its a cop-out to bandwagon appeal, avoiding arguing your points for their merits. It is rarely used by adults, thus his assumption you might be in school is warranted. Lastly, all coaches aren’t created equal.
Where is your credibilty
Oh course I am not going to through names names out there of people you probably don’t know. I also don’t see any of you guys credibility in this debate. Only thing I see is each of you taking turns defending each other but I don’t see you trying to argue my points above. Samething applys for Tater, the only thing you guys are interested in is attacking anything I say that is personal but you are not trying to debate my points. So I suggest that you are using my personal sources as a “cop out to bandwagon a appeal, thus avoiding arguing my points”. See you won’t they to argue my points but instead you question everything else. Stick to the topic and argue my points..
Why do you think Moore is bad this year?
I can only think of a couple right now. I mean besides the obvious. Like our coaches suck and the line sucks. We have the same coaches and line that we had last year though -1. Last year Matt looked good. Somewhere along the lines he forgot how to do it. So can I get some feedback on this one?
1. Tape
2. Pressure
3.?
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
I said last year that Moore didn't look good.
He looked like Jake Delhomme, which is not a good thing.
I was called out for it on other boards – I questioned his accuracy and his decision making. Clearly I was right.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
Well I did too
in the first half he was all over the place, but then he would settle. I attributed this to jitters, but that excuse is long gone.
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
I rememeber
A article this summer that everyone ridiculed because it predicted Moore’s flaws would be exposed once defenses began to gameplan against him this included his accuracy and decision making
3. Blocking
3a. Hoover
3b. Otah
3c. Moose
3d. Vincent
4. improper use of TEs in play calling
5. doesn’t hold his mouth right in non hurry up situations
But he didnt have Otah or Gross when he was in though right?
If memory serves correct he had Wharton, Bern, Kalil, Vincent,Schwartz.
And it’s not like WR’s aren’t getting open. Was Moose his most productive WR?
And it’s kinda Matt’s fault for not using the TE’s that can’t be in to block on every play.
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
You also should not be inciting these kinds of attitudes by calling it things like...
His “little” article
or…
His “little” garbage time statistics.
That is the way you would talk to a child. BigD took the time to compile statistics and make a legitimate argument to support his opinion that we should be running more hurry up offense. Belittling his research and time put in to writing this post makes you look rude and like an instigator, so think about that before trying to make a post to “keep it real”
Unofficial Agent for Armanti Edwards, WR #10, Carolina Panthers
You might want to use smaller words Tater
I don’t think he’ll understand what instigator means, based on some of the arguments he’s posed in this thread.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
For the record....
James removed a lot of the content of this thread last night. It was getting pretty heated between a couple of folks. I never posted last nigh but I did read them all. I think both parties are guilty of belittling each other.
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
ah, this is the first im reading it
But I did see James comment above. I just can’t tolerate it when people try to silence someone elses voice. Everyone has a right to their opinion, but no one has the right to contest that opinion unless they have facts, or they can express their own opinion in a manner that is not condescending to the other.
Unofficial Agent for Armanti Edwards, WR #10, Carolina Panthers
True that!
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
you think he could handle mixed up zone blitzes?
I sure as hell do not.
bottom line is he can not make reads when the D mixes it up. Gettis beating his man all day last week is a sign of that. Moore never threw it to him. And so what if 89 was stomping his feet demanding the ball. It was Moore’s responsibility as the leader of that O to tell him to STFU and just beat his man.
If the D goes to man and sends 6, then delivers a nice jam at the line… what do you think will happen? If 89 is not free then that is a sack or a forced throw.
He is just too inconsistent. Sometimes he hits guys instride. sometimes he overthrows. sometimes he underthrows. Sometimes he does not go through his reads. Sometimes he never sees wide open guys. Sometimes he forces the ball. Sometimes he makes bad throws. Sometimes he looks good. Most (you could probably change of a few of the “sometimes” to “Most” I am being generous) of the time he looks bad.
Sorry BigD, but there’s really no point in keeping the faith in this guy. It is what it is.
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
He should take a page
out of Philip Rivers, jay Cutler, or even Jimmy Clausens book and grow some balls and tell Smith to shut him mouth and get open…. Or grab the Oline by the throat and tell them that they are killing his butt.. Moore is just not good end of story stop making excuses for the man
When has Clausen ever told Smitty to shut his mouth and get open?
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
I will give him credit...
At the 49ers game, Smitty was yapping off to the refs and Moore came up behind him and pretty forcefully pulled him back by his pads away from the refs.
I don’t know if Clausen would have done that.
Almost certainly not, but as a rookie it isn't his place to tell the team captain what to do.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
Sorry to interject, just reading this for the first time..
But why does that not count? It is directly related to “growing some balls” but doesn’t count because.. well.. it goes against your opinion?
The Carolina Panthers are the best team in the NFL, except on Sundays.
he has did that a Notre Dame
As a rookie he can’t but I am positive that in a few years he will… I have seen Clausen also do that at other team mates already this season… but of course he can’t do that to smith because how would that look really?
Then don't suggest that he do it.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
He should though
Smitty would probably pout at the moment, maybe not, but he would respect him later.
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
26/34 is a better ratio than sometimes - that's the point
I’m not ignoring his glaring inconsistencies, in his total performance this year. Your point there is absolutely correct, and I whole-heartedly agree with you.
STEVEN, that’s the reason I made the damned post, if you think about it that way. I was trying to find out if he was LESS inconsistent in the hurry-up, and VOILA – he is.
So that’s why I’m suggesting the coaches try to use it more, to take advantage of the maybe-unexplainable, yet strong and undeniable, tendency he has to perform way better in those set-ups.
I’m sure not saying he’s Peyton Manning. Yet his stats in those 10 minutes of playing in those shotgun, hurry-up, often no-huddle drives is making him close to it.
Hey I'm all for it
I just doubt it will work for long, but it’s no sweat off my balls to see some more entertaining football for a little while.
I mean hell if we do it and it works then great! lets win the next 9 games. And if it fails then we know that Moore is useless. Win-Win
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
No Offense(no pun intended)
But I think the best way to prove your point is to compare MM no huddle offense to other starting qbs no huddle. Obviously it’s a lot of work and I don’t expect anyone to do that(nor do I have any idea how one would really). Honestly, stats don’t mean anything without anything to compare them too.
Something I would also consider to be a factor is the propenisity for there to be 3wr/4wr going out on the no huddle and our traditional formation without it being 2wr, I think Pat Y had a stat about the Panthers running 3wr sets less than anyother team by a significant amount. Obviously, this is a play-calling issue however when 4wrs are being sent out against more vanilla coverages(due to the defenses not having enough time to play more adv d) it leads itself to higher completetion %. I think it would be interesting to have 4wr looks on 1st and 2nd more often(even for runs because it spreads everything out).
I’m not going sit here and say Qb A should start over Qb B or vice versa because I don’t honestly know who’s better right now or in the long run. Is it better to win a game today or a game tomorrow? Idk. They’ve both played brilliant at times and terrible at others. Sometimes it wasn’t there fault others it was. All I know is that right now the Panthers are a terrible TEAM from top to bottom and most positions could stand to get better, QBs included. I’m not saying we need a new qb(at the moment for the very least) but we need better production from whomever is the starting qb.
Keep your heads up, It’ll get better one day.
Without comparable film to study from other games, on other QBs, even I couldn't do what you suggest.
And honestly, if every other team has a QB who can produce the results Matt Moore has in his hurry up sequences, then they ALL should be doing what I suggest.
I’m only thinking of the Panthers, and if every other QB in the world could do as well as he has, it wouldn’t lessen my desire for HIM to be able to do it, way more often, if not the whole game. As it’s never been tried before, you can bet it’d bamfoozle the opposition at least one game.
In other words, it’s not he stacks up doing it, vs other QBs – it’s how much more productive he is, for us, in the hurry up, than when he’s not. Does that make sense?
I took a look at one player who has been hailed as running a great hurry up this season- Alex Smith of the 49ers
Looking at two games where the game was winnable: New Orleans where they lost by 3, and Philadelphia where they lost by three I think you have a comparable situation to Moore against teams who most would agree were much tougher than the teams Carolina faced. The game vs. Atlanta was also winnable, but due to a fumbled kickoff by the 49ers there was no chance for a two minute offense.
Game 1 vs. New Orleans:
- Alex Smith takes over with 2:12 left in the game down by 7
- Statistics: 5/6, 51 yards (83% completion) 2 scrambles, 24 yards
- Result of the drive: 7 yard TD run by Gore, 2 pt conversion pass by Smith
- Total drive time: 53 seconds
Game 2 vs. Philadelphia
- Alex Smith takes over with 4:35 left in the game down by 10. They are in full hurry up
- Statistics: 5/6, 30 yards (83% completion) 1 scramble, 11 yards
- Result of the drive: 1 yard TD pass to Gore
- Total drive time: 2:16
- Alex Smith takes over with 1:28 left in the game.
- Statistics: 2/5 25 yards (40% completion)
- Result of the drive: INT by Smith
- Total drive time: 52 seconds
Granted, the 49ers only had two occasions to run the hurry up offense but the stats speak for themselves:
- 142 yards in 4:05 (34.7 yards per minute vs. Moore’s 25 yards per minute)
- Points produced: 16 points in 3:13 (4.97 points per minutes vs. Moore’s 1.98 points per minute)
- Seven 1st downs (1.71 per minute vs. Moore’s 1.1 per minute)
- One turnover (0.24 per minute vs. Moore’s 0.39 per minute)
So there’s a comparison to another average QB who runs a fantastic hurry up. I chose Smith solely because numerous commentators have references how great he is at running a two minute offense… but it’s curious to see.
Follow me on Twitter! @James_Dator
Think you bobbled some of the math...
Not sure how you figured the turn over per minutes…
3 turnovers in 10m 4s is 3.355 minutes per turnover (or 0.298 turnovers per minute).
1 turnover in 4m 5s is 4.083 minutes per turnover (or 0.245 turnovers per minute).
So the Alex Smith figure is correct.
I had Moore at 4 turnovers
1 was a sack fumble, and 3 INTs
Really though, turnovers is the weakest stat to hang on because there is a fair argument to be made for the Edwards INT, the Hail Mary INT and the sack fumble… but regardless, I’m going purely from the stat sheets which show three INTs and a fumble for Moore in these situations
Follow me on Twitter! @James_Dator
I think the difference is an individual persepctive vs. a team perspective.
Yes, Matt Moore, the individual, looks better in the hurry up offense. The team, as a whole though, does not.
The team (of which he's the field leader) earned those same 20 points in those same 10 minutes.
I really don’t see the differentiation.
Please see my reply to James, below.
This tendency to blame Moore for what never happened is getting old.
WOOSH!
That’s the sound of the point going over your head. You seem to think I’m on some diabolical crusade to sully Moore’s good name.
The truth of the matter? I don’t care who caused the turn overs, they still happened.
WOOSH yourself.
Read my post to James, before you repeat his errors.
There were NOT 4 turnovers. There was NO fumble lost. The Edwards INT has nothing to do with hurry up time.
Get your facts straight.
Nope.
I think that was my fault for erroneously calling it a turn over and never fact checking
Helps to read.
I believe you made some uncharacteristic errors, James
There were NO fumbles lost by Moore in hurry-up this year. If you’re looking at the sack/fumble I referenced in the Giants game, it was not a turnover. Gross caused it with his whiff, but recovered it, then Clausen came in and threw 2 quick incompletions, leading to a punt. Funny how people saddle Moore with sack/fumbles he didn’t cause, and never even led to turnovers.
Stats don’t work right if the facts underlying them are erroneous.
And you also want to count the INT off Edwards hands/knee – but that, too was NOT in hurry-up mode, so exclude that from the parameters we’re discussing. If you want to count it against Moore, it only further buttresses my feeling that he has more turnovers (plays worse) when he’s NOT in the hurry up.
The only turnovers Moore has to count against him in the 10+ minutes he’s played in that setup are the Hail Mary (you know how I feel about that not being a valid turnover) and the last in the St Louis game, where Smith went all wanderer on him. I’ll give you that one, cause I have no idea what route Smith was supposed to run (tho I assume it included the expectation that he might turn around, at some point, and Moore WAS pretty mad about it) – but the Hail Mary, no way. That makes 1 valid turnover to hang on Moore, a far better ratio than Alex Smith – and probably better than any other QB you can find.
Plenty of mistakes to go around, as well as data fudging...
Giants:
1st and 10 at CAR 20 (Shotgun) M.Moore pass incomplete short right to D.Jarrett [J.Tuck].
2nd and 10 at CAR 20 (Shotgun) M.Moore sacked at CAR 13 for -7 yards (M.Kiwanuka).
3rd and 17 at CAR 13 (No Huddle, Shotgun) M.Moore pass deep middle to D.Jarrett to CAR 34 for 21 yards (K.Phillips).
1st and 10 at CAR 34 (No Huddle, Shotgun) M.Moore pass incomplete short left to B.LaFell.
2nd and 10 at CAR 34 (Shotgun) M.Moore pass incomplete deep left to B.LaFell [M.Boley].
3rd and 10 at CAR 34 (Shotgun) M.Moore pass deep right to D.Jarrett pushed ob at NYG 47 for 19 yards (C.Webster).
1st and 10 at NYG 47 (Shotgun) M.Moore pass short left to B.LaFell pushed ob at NYG 33 for 14 yards (B.Johnson).
1st and 10 at NYG 33 (Shotgun) M.Moore pass short middle to D.Rosario to NYG 29 for 4 yards (M.Boley).
2nd and 6 at NYG 29 (No Huddle, Shotgun) M.Moore pass incomplete deep right to D.Jarrett (C.Webster).
3rd and 6 at NYG 29 (Shotgun) M.Moore pass incomplete deep left to B.LaFell (B.Johnson) [J.Tuck]. PENALTY on NYG-B.Johnson, Defensive Pass Interference, 25 yards, enforced at NYG 29 – No Play.
1st and 4 at NYG 4 M.Moore pass incomplete short right to S.Smith (C.Webster).
2nd and 4 at NYG 4 (Shotgun) M.Moore pass incomplete short right to B.LaFell. CAR-M.Goodson was injured during the play.
3rd and 4 at NYG 4 M.Moore pass short right intended for S.Smith INTERCEPTED by T.Thomas at NYG -6. Touchback.
Bengals:
1st and 10 at CAR 20 (Shotgun) M.Moore pass incomplete deep left to A.Edwards.
2nd and 10 at CAR 20 M.Moore pass short middle intended for A.Edwards INTERCEPTED by B.Urlacher at CAR 23. B.Urlacher to CAR 23 for no gain (M.Bernadeau).
There’s no way to tell what they were planning here. I believe based on the previous series where they went with 3 passes from Clausen in the Shotgun, and the fact that both of the plays here were passes, and the fact that they ran all-pass plays on the next series, we can call this also a hurry-up offense (similar to the 0/1 that I referenced to Campbell in one series).
Conclusion:
So we have the St. Louis INT, and the two INTs that I just described. That’s still 3 turnovers and that’s not even counting the hail mary INT (which would bring the grand total up to 4). So, I’ll give you the fumble, I think that was my fault for erroneously calling it a turn over and never fact checking. But on the other hand you didn’t count either of these INTs against him. Next time, I’ll fact check you first instead of taking your points at face value.
Why did you leave out the entire series against the Giants when it’s clear they were going no huddle, anyway?
Btw...
I know you contend that Moore isn’t at fault for the Edwards INT, but that’s neither here nor there since for my argument the fault of one or the other isn’t the issue. It’s the fact that it happened and it happened during hurry up offense.
He's evaluating the hurry-up under Moore.
That the INT was not on him has to be part of the evaluation. I’m not saying the whole world is gray, but it can’t be entirely black and white.
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
But the offense doesn't operate in a vacuum like that
That’s what I’ve been trying to tell people. It’s like trying to take the best of Moore in a specific situation without taking the rest of the team in context. If you spread Moore’s performance out in this specific situation, you would have to do the same for every single player on offense.
Because his argument doesn’t do that, it’s logically flawed. Once you do evaluate the entirety of the offense in this situation, the idea is no longer feasible.
Sure
And Armanti doesn’t have a jersey anymore. The offense continues to change weekly, so what you suggest would be nearly impossible.
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
Edwards may be more responsible for the INT then Moore, but both are still at fault
if Armanti were a better WR, he might have caught that ball. If Moore were a better QB, he would have put it in a place where it were easier to catch.
Both got unlucky in the fluky way that it bounced instead of just falling down.
Unofficial Agent for Armanti Edwards, WR #10, Carolina Panthers
I left out the NYG series you cited because it started at the 11:25 mark of the 4Q.
While many of those plays saw Moore in the gun, they weren’t in the hurry up mode, or alignment, that I’m talking about.
All those completions, and the INT that ended the drive, are part of the normal game conditions that further prove he does better when the time is running down, and when we go to a 4WR, I back set. The INT wasn’t even from the gun, indicating that this series wasn’t hurry up at all.
I guess when you make an oversight error, you have to scurry to try to find an offsetting error on my part, huh? C’mon, you’re better than that.
Then we have two different definitions of "hurry up"
The only times Moore did not go no-huddle were when the clock was stopped and therefore didn’t need to.
You're right on the fumble... but ace is right on the INT
The NFL.com play by play here clearly shows the drive starting at 11:36 being a no huddle drive resulting in the following stat line:
4/11, 58 yards, 1 INT
Follow me on Twitter! @James_Dator
I believe you're right about that drive, James.
After reviewing the link you provided, I believe it WAS in the hurry up mode I’ve been talking about. Though the INT play came from UC, the facts that all 13 plays in that drive were passes, and the other fact that those 13 plays only took 2 minutes, 50 seconds (under 14 secs per), I must admit my error in not including it in my summary.
I didn’t “fudge” it, though, having honestly assumed that we’d only run a hurry up in late time situations.
If that invalidates my entire theory, then I’m a horse’s ass, and I beg the indulgence of the board for my mistake, and for bringing up the whole thing. I thought it might be a saving grace for the rest of the season. I won’t try to make the weak argument that Moore did drive the ball 76 yards in those 2:50, because it ultimately ended in the INT you mentioned. My bad.
There's nothing wrong with your argument
but if you’re going to project what the offense can do you need to look at what the offense did.
Also… did you just say his INT is trumped by the fact that the moved the ball 76 yards?
No, I said that argument would be weak, and I wouldn't make it.
The end result is what counts, and the end result was an INT, as you and James pointed out.
I knew that series existed, but I fallaciously thought that because it occurred so far before the end of the half/game, it wouldn’t count in my hurry up grouping. I was wrong about that, and I openly admit it.
It certainly lessens, at best, the importance of my conclusion.
Then the 49ers should try my approach, too.
When his shoulder heals, they should use it more often. Like the Panthers, they need a new approach, as the same ol’ stuff ain’t getting it.
Hoe many times in a game do you hear an announcer say, “Well, Dick, I see the _ are going to the hurry up, no- huddle look. Good idea to try to pick up the tempo and try something new”? I’m not being revolutionary here, advocating for something that’s never been done, or outdated, like the single-wing. Moore’s got this talent for that set-up – do it til it fails.
It certainly has more merit than trying Edwards, for example, or some Mountaineer package we’ve had no success or experience with. I don’t hear any better ideas.
I disagree on the Edwards aspect
If you run the Mountaineer with Armanti Edwards now, you’re working on building an offensive package that can be plugged in when needed in any situation.
On the other hand the hurry up is to merely make up for the offensive ineptitude of the coaching staff then it’s a bandaid and will be gone when the coaches are gone, whereas Armanti’s package has a long term future (that sounds bad…).
Finally, I think you need to take the good with the bad. If you’re going to say that it provides an offensive spark then you also need to acknowledge that as a team the Panthers turned the ball over 4 times in 10 minutes of offense. Take Moore out of the equation this shows that the OL, the WRs etc aren’t prepared to run plays that fast. Extrapolate that out, and you’re looking at 10-12 turnovers per game by the offense.
Maybe you take a few turnovers away because they wont be forcing plays as much, but the liability of the turnovers needs to be accounted for as much as the benefit of the offensive movement.
Follow me on Twitter! @James_Dator
Digging a bigger hole by shoveling more won't work.
That 4 turnover drum you keep beating has no resonance in fact.
The stats I showed HAVE basis in experience; Edwards in the wildcat is an unproven bandage.
“The liability of the turnovers…” c’mon. Retract that, due to your errors in calculating stuff that doesn’t fir the case, or never happened.
I apologize when I make an error. You keep repeating it Saying something over and over, that’s wrong, doesn’t make it fact.
Edwards in the wildcat is just unproven, and it doesn't need to be a bandage.
We clearly drafted the guy knowing he had the skillset to run that particular part of an offense. Actually running it in a game will improve it and make it a staple as time goes on. It isn’t a bandage that we need to fix anything, it’s a good practice that will give our team more diversity on offense as we move forward.
If they drafted Armanti and had no intention of ever using this offense, we would have never seen it in preseason, back when we weren’t looking to bandage things up. I think it’s something that should be in our playbook even if/when we fix our offensive woes. It should be a part of our weekly game plan.
Unofficial Agent for Armanti Edwards, WR #10, Carolina Panthers
I thought you said 'bondage'
So I already took my Viagra. Any ideas…nevermind.
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
by ERL on Nov 3, 2010 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions
Give me a chance to read you comments before deriding everything in one fell swoop, therefore rending you 'you keep repeating' comment inaccurate. It makes it unfairly seem like i'm needlessly intractable rather than not having time to address an error.
I made an error on the sack INT but you made an error on the INT in the Giants game.
So… let’s say he gave up an INT against the Giants, and an INT against the Rams in the no-huddle.
That’s two interceptions in 10:04 minutes of offense. The Panthers average 27 minutes of offense this season. Therefore, running the exact same hurry-up we can expect over 5 interceptions per average game.
Follow me on Twitter! @James_Dator
3 INTs...
The A.Edwards was definitely in a hurry-up mindset, even though the series only lasted 2 plays. Both plays were passes from the shot gun. The series beforehand were all plays from shotgun. The series after that were all plays from shotgun.
Would they mysteriously stop running a no-huddle offense for no reason?
I can't answer that
When I was notating the Alex Smith drives I looked specifically at only those that said ‘no-huddle’. I agree with you, it doesn’t make sense… but per the NFL it wasn’t a no-huddle so that’s what I’ll go with.
Follow me on Twitter! @James_Dator
well...
It is hard to go no-huddle when you never find yourself in a situation where you need to go no-huddle. such as when all your passes are incomplete or out of bounds.
On this...
As it’s never been tried before, you can bet it’d bamfoozle the opposition at least one game.
I assume you are referring to here in Carolina. Jim Kelly ran the no huddle (K-gun) for most of his career. It got them to 4 Super Bowls so it was definitely successful. Unfortunately, Matt Moore is no Jim Kelly. Actually, he’s closer to Ryan Leaf. In fact, the only difference between Matt Moore and Ryan Leaf is that Matt was never projected to be any good to start with. I thought he looked good last season but he’s convinced me that he’s not that good.
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
Exactly
He is not that good but some people think that just because he put up some decent stats in garabe time he should start
I can remove myself from the situation......
and see some sense in both arguments. I do believe that Moore got a raw deal early in the season. He should have sat out for a game after the concussion, then come back as the full time starter in week 3. Clausen would have gotten a games worth of experience without any undue pressure. If Matt comes back in week 3 and sucks it up thru the bye week, then you can make the switch to Clausen and no one raises an eyebrow. In this scenario, everyone understands that Moore’s not the answer and we’ve got to play the rookie to see what we’ve got. The flip flopping just makes us look clueless (which we are) and desperate. In my opinion, we’ve got to go back to Clausen pretty soon. I know he’s going to look bad due to the many other problems we have but we need to see what he can do down the stretch.
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
This is the old Moore/Clausen debate - we've done this a hundred times.
Who’s the real QB of the future, blah, blah, blah?
This topic is entirely different. I’m not talking about last year’s stats, or who we go to next year. Can we benefit from Moore’s markedly increased success when he runs a hurry up, by incorporating it in other than 2 minute situations? That’s the question.
This particular post of mine wasn't intended to address your "question".
I’ve already stated here that I’m all for whatever will help us win. I don’t know what else you want me to say. You want to run the no huddle/hurry up, run the god damn thing, I really don’t give a shit. I haven’t done or said anything to discredit or belittle your post. I appreciate the time and effort you put into it and you are entitled to your opinion. I haven’t even insinuated that I was against the “no-huddle” idea so I’m not entirely sure what your problem with me is. If it’s because I said that I thought Moore was more like Ryan Leaf than Jim Kelly, too bad. I’m not going to change my opinion of Moore as a whole just to support your post or to make you feel better about your allegiance to him.
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
Matt Moore's also not a psycho.....
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
Yet. Who knows if he keeps getting beat to hell.
But that’s not what I’m talking about.
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
I know ... I was just trying to make light of the situation to ease the tension that's building.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
Lol...
No tension here. I never posted last night because it way too intense for me. I just want to win. If that means putting pads on Sir Purr and the Top Cats, let’s do it!!!
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
FINALLY
A good reason to post this pic…
Let us pause… and thank god they are on our side.
Unofficial Agent for Armanti Edwards, WR #10, Carolina Panthers
Why do you need a reason?
How long have you been holding out on us Tater? lol
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
It's important that we save pictures of the Top Cats' backsides
Until we need them the most. lol.
Unofficial Agent for Armanti Edwards, WR #10, Carolina Panthers
notice anything funny about this pic?
Which one has no ass???
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
Holy shit!
WTF is up with that? I guess that’s what we get for stereotyping.
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
hahahahhaha
EXACTLY!
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
Oh, my, god...
Becky, look at their butts!!!!
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
Damn, you guys are hard-headed.
Moore’s overall stats this year are crap.
I agree with that. Closer to Ryan Leaf than Jim Kelly. I agree again.
But you’re ignoring the premise of what I’m saying: that Moore in the hurry up is a whole different player than Moore is in the regular set.
The numbers prove that, without a shadow of a doubt, don’t they?
So why are you arguing about this? Maybe Jim Kelly was the HOF QB he was BECAUSE he ran the K-gun. Ever think of that? Maybe his coaches saw that it fitted his skill set better than traditional sets. That’s what I’m getting at. See what I mean?
We’ll never know until the staff tries it – and sadly, they probably won’t, and all this is just conjecture on my part. But you’re bringing up Jim Kelly is helpful to me, because it shows it can work, if the right guy’s doing it. I’m saying Matt Moore (with the stipulation that it’s in the hurry up) could do it, too.
I totally agree with you regarding Kelly.
I brough him up as an example of someone who has run this thing successfully on a broad scale. His ability to run the K-gun is what made him so dominate. That and the fact that he was a tough SOB with a refuse to loose attitude.
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
You're not really in a position to call anyone stubborn.
You ignore my counter-argument to this proposal just as stubbornly as anyone else ignores yours.
That was odd!
I’ve seen these threads get a little nasty on occasion, but this one showed me something. No matter your opinions on coach, OC, Clausen, Moore, the running game, or the no huddle. You are all in agreement on one thing. We need some change. It also makes a person feel good to see there are passionate fans who arent fairweather. I’ve tried my hardest not to be fairweather this year. Even to the point I’ve not posted much lately. I’m a proud homer and I WISH WISH WISH they’d try the no huddle like you suggested. Even if we lost the game, I KNOW we’d score more than 10 points. I told my brother a few years ago that we needed a new offensive system, because this one is “driving a Ferrari as if it were an SUV.”
yeah definitely time for change. Just sucks that it won’t happen untill next year. It would be nice to have something to get excited about and see a direction that the team is going, but I’m cool with losing out as well. Top 3 draft pick would be sweet.
I just wish we could see if Clausen has “IT” or not. Then we know what to draft. He really needs to finsih out the season so there’s time to see progress. I do not care who gives us the best chance to win the game. That could be Moore, but winning is kinda counterproductive at this point. We have a future that needs to be sorted and Moore is of no part of it…
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
Exactly so playing Moore Right now just because “he gives us the best chance to win” is completely pointless
So Matt Moore coming in and leading us to all those victories at the end of last season was pointless to you too?
I don’t know about anyone else, but that was the only saving grace from last season, and the only reason I didn’t spend the entire offseason dreading this one.
There is something to be said for playing for pride.
What are we showing all our rookies if we are content to lose out in the interest of getting higher draft picks? It is not a culture I want to see cultivated. Ever. You play every game to win, all the time.
Unofficial Agent for Armanti Edwards, WR #10, Carolina Panthers
by Tater596 on Nov 3, 2010 10:27 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME!!!!
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
So that's what you do....
Dammit … I knew I was forgetting something.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
lol...
Great.
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
well last year's play of Moore...
was giving me hope for this year. I knew Jake was done. I had no idea who we would draft, but I never expected a QB under Fox with our first pick.
So seeing Moore play the way he did made me feel this " oooh next year bitches" feeling. I liked it, but now Matt is Jake and Jimbo is Matt. See what I mean? If we see that Clausen shows 0 improvement by the end of the year we know what we need with that first pick. If Clausen corrects his mistakes steadily throughout the season then we might want to address another position of need.
And I don’t think that the coaches should go tell all our rooks “hey we are going to throw the games so we can get a good draft pick”. There’s just no chance right now that we win. Not with Fox/Davidson.
Like someone said below. F/D will not show everyone that they are incompetent and turn over the playcalling to a guy that has’nt even played a whole season of football. So untill next year.
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
I see where you are coming from
And I understand all the arguments in favor of putting Clausen back out there, but I think for now we should stick with Moore. I think it is important for our rookies to win a couple more games at least Late in the season, it may not hurt to let him get some time, but he is not the only one we are evaluating. Moore gives us our best chance to get good looks at LaFell, Gettis, and maybe even Edwards. With Clausen under center, we may get to evaluate him, but not necessarily those guys.
Especially if we are thinking A.J. Green. We need to know exactly how our WR situation stands too.
Unofficial Agent for Armanti Edwards, WR #10, Carolina Panthers
True
I can entertain this
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
If we play to lose, to get a high draft choice next year, who exactly are the losers?
I’ll tell you – the guys on the roster now, who’re going to be replaced by those draft choices. Sure sounds like a logical plan to me.
If we lose every game from here on out, so be it. But let’s do it trying to win every game, and if that means trying a new approach, what’s the harm?
right now they are
thats the only reason you guys want him to start.. I bet you can’t think of any oqther reason he should start besides what he at the end of last year when we out of the playoffs
I can think of a reason.
Moore is a better QB at this point in the season than Clausen is. You can make arguments that Moore sucks with no facts behind them all you want, but at the end of the day, he’s still better at this present time, so he’s the starter. Until Clausen proves to the coaching staff in practice, or until Moore Jake-bombs and we’re eliminated from the playoffs, Moore is, and should be, the starter.
You keep blaming Moore, but you fail to realize that the problems on offense go way beyond the QB. We have an OL that can’t block for shit, an OC who can’t call plays for shit, and two RB’s who can’t find open holes and gain positive yards for shit. Until those things are cleared up, we will struggle on offense, regardless of who is under center.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
Reasons Moore should start besides what he did at the end of the year last year...
1. We need to evaluate more than just Matt Moore. We need to evaluate the talent that depends on him. We have three rookie Wide Receivers that deserve the best chance we can give them to showcase their skills. Because right now, we are a good contender for taking A.J. Green with our first overall pick. We need to know what we have in each of these guys, and if we should instead go after a different need.
2. We need to give both the team and the fans something to be excited about. And this stems from my first point. Even if MM is gone after this season, we need to have some faith that we have offensive talent in place that can be improved by an upgrade at QB. We need our young receivers to have some good games under their belts, and some experience with a QB that has spent some time in the league. Like it or not, Matt Moore is that guy, he at least knows what it takes to be a NFL QB. His execution may be questionable, but he is certainly ahead of Clausen in that regard. If we come out of this season feeling like we draft 2 QBs and 3 WRs and we didn’t improve our roster in EITHER area, there are dark days ahead.
3. As noted above… you play to the whistle, so to speak. You are playing professional football, and paid to win football games, especially if you are a coach. John Fox may be on his way out, but he will still play to win all the time. You saw it last year. We may have been out of the playoff race, but we certainly did some winning. We didn’t fold in favor of earlier draft picks. To that end, Matt Moore at least has to start your games. If we fall behind, I would expect we see a switch to Clausen faster than expected for that purpose of evaluating him, but I still expect when we have a chance to win games to see our best team on the field.
Unofficial Agent for Armanti Edwards, WR #10, Carolina Panthers
Whats more important QB or Widereciever? I think its more important to evaluate clausen rather than the widerecievers. Also where do you get the idea that Moorecan execute better than Clausen? Also why do you think Moore gives us the best chance to win? Playing Moore is pointless now because he is not going to be around for much longer and the season is now over. So why not play clausen and get him some experience? So I have come to the conclusion that you want Clausen to make rookie mistakes down the road when it counts due to his lack of expierence. Playing Moore slows down the future for Clausen. Also I am going to go back to Peyton Mannings rookie year to show the imprortance of playing time. 1998 his rookie year i believe they only won three games but the importance of that is Manning got experience and that set them up to be good for the next decade. Not saying Clausen is Manning but Clausen needs to be out there now learning how to play in this league so we can see whether we need a new QB rather than WR’s because good QB’s can make average receivers good. QB is more important at this point than WR and Clausen getting playing time is more important than our win lose record at this point also because it could set us up to be successful down the road now that this season is done winning wise.
How do you know Moore's not goung to be around much longer?
Did your certified coach share that secret with you?
Maybe it’s Moore who needs the valuable playing time. He still hasn’t started a full season in the league.
Uh....
Now that’s a stretch. Moore’s been in this system for 4 years now. He should know what’s going on. If he doesn’t, playing time isn’t going to help him.
playing time isn’t going to help him.
I have to disagree. If someone shoots you with an airsoft gun, a paintball gun, and a real gun, are you going to walk away with the same knowledge of experience from each? Maybe Moore isn’t the answer or maybe he hasn’t been shot enough. The same could be said for Clausen. Hell, the same could be said for Pike and Edwards if we’re going to make it black and white (that totally has a double meaning that I am not implying). Saying that playing time isn’t going to help anyone just isn’t an idea I can get behind.
The Carolina Panthers are the best team in the NFL, except on Sundays.
I consider evaluating all of our talent important
And the fairest way to do that is to keep Moore in at QB because at this point in their careers, Moore has more experience and is better equipped to be out there than Clausen. There are 3 WRs hinging on what the QB can do, it is only fair we give them the best shot we can to impress.
I get the idea that Moore can execute better than Clausen because he HAS executed better than Clausen. It’s not night and day, but he has been better.
Playing Moore is NOT pointless now, or at least not any more pointless than playing Clausen. Why are we so hung up on seeing what Clausen can do? So we can watch him run an offense that won’t even exist next season? We know the kid can throw the ball pretty well, what we don’t know is how well he can run an NFL offense. Why force him in there to run an offense he won’t be running next season? To me it wouldn’t be fair. He should get his chance next year under the new regime and the new offense, because right now our offense is going to make him look worse than he really is.
So I have come to the conclusion that you want Clausen to make rookie mistakes down the road when it counts due to his lack of expierence[sic]. Playing Moore slows down the future for Clausen.
And I have come to the conclusion that you come to conclusions way to quickly. Playing Clausen right now could be far more damaging to his development than not playing him. I don’t know how I feel marching him out there behind our current offensive line, or having him throw passes to WRs who aren’t running the best routes yet. I also don’t know exactly what good it will do for his experience when the playbook is going to be wiped clean next year.
I know you’re not directly comparing Clausen to Manning, but it has to be said that there was never a doubt that Peyton Manning was going to be a superstar in this league. There are plenty of doubts surrounding Clausen, and playing him in a bad situation right now may not be the best idea.
Unofficial Agent for Armanti Edwards, WR #10, Carolina Panthers
I get the feeling...
A lot of people have seen enough of LaFell and Gettis to say that they’re going to be fine. That’s why they aren’t that worried about their evaluation.
Not to say there isn’t still experience to be gained for either, but the evaluation process on those two is kinda over.
Eh, I disagree
Both look promising, but they need to continue to learn and develop under the best conditions we can give them. Matt Moore may not be the best QB in the world, but he does have a sense for how wide receivers should run their routes in the NFL, and he throws the ball accordingly. The example that comes to mind is the interception he threw to Armanti. On first glace it looks like a bad pass that was behind Armanti and low. On second glance you’ll notice that Armanti did not run a crisp slant route. He cut in to far. He was only off by about a yard so that doesnt completely excuse Moore, but it would have been a better pass and more catchable had he been in the exact right place. (Ball would have been lower than where he caught it, but it would have been properly out in front of him, just low)
I think if Clausen is in on that pass, it would be complete, but in reality for Armanti’s development at WR, it was better that it wasn’t complete. This is because Clausen would have adapted to the route instead of relying on proper timing. Sure you end up with a completed pass, but you also give the WR reason to believe they ran the route correctly, even though they did not.
Unofficial Agent for Armanti Edwards, WR #10, Carolina Panthers
…Clausen would have adapted to the route instead of relying on proper timing. Sure you end up with a completed pass, but you also give the WR reason to believe they ran the route correctly, even though they did not.
Good observation.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
And then the possibility exists that it might have been tipped at the line, also.
Those quick slants have to be more vertical in their delivery than the more 3/4 motion Clausen has exhibited – hence, his deflections have been more frequent.
But all that’s speculation. The only things that are for sure, from what actually happened, is that Edwards learns how to run the route better (for the reason explained by tater), and that Moore gets another INT on his ranking. I doubt he even looks at same, but the fans do.
Ideally, and this has nothing to do with Moore, per se, but I wish there were a stat for WRs that toted up Interceptions Caused to His QB by Letting a Catchable Ball Go Through His Hands, or Off His Facemask – then subtract those from the poor QB who deserved better. (Call them Whoopsies, or OHshits.)
That's where the coaches have to catch it in film study.
Although given not many will be back, you have to wonder how much dedication they are putting into that.
by Flowing Willow on Nov 5, 2010 8:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Thank you.
If we’d score more than 10 points, we might have a chance to win games.
My main point got swept away in the house cleaning so I'll restate it here...
The offense functions as a unit. Therefore, you cannot take just Matt Moore’s play and spread it out throughout an entire game without taking the entire offensive unit with you. Because of that, it doesn’t matter if a turnover is Moore’s fault or someone else’s, they’re still going to be present because the offensive unit is still going to function in the same manner. Throwing out the hail mary, you still end up with 3 out of 11 turnovers (9 INTs, 2 Fumbles).
So these situations represent 22% of the field goals, 25% of the touch downs, and 27% of the turnovers.
Sure the turnovers at the time may have not mattered when there’s only 30 seconds left in the game/half. But they certainly will matter when there’s 13 minutes left.
This is a VERY good point
When we are running the 2 min drill and turn the ball over, it’s pointless. The other team only needs to run out the clock. They won’t take any chances. There’s no point. They just run out the clock and the game is over. No need to take a chance moving the ball down the field for a TD or FG because they have the ball and the game is now out of reach.
If this happens during game time on our side of the field, it will most definitely result in points.
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
Please recount those 4 turnovers you keep spouting about.
There were only 2, including the Hail Mary.
Incorrecto
There are 4, including the Hail Marry. You just omitted 2 others from this post entirely.
If the staff is "committed to winning"
I think a hurry-up, no-huddle predicated game-plan is as viable as…hmm…I don’t know throwing the ball 9 times with Chris Weinke and having Deangelo Williams run the wildcat (for the first time in decades on an NFL team).
Really…what is there to lose at this point? We are already in spoiler mode, plus the Saints are hurtin at DB.
Hey go for it
I couldn’t care less. I just HIGHLY doubt it will work for more than a series or two. Maybe even a whole game, but then what? back to square one.
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
really if we even want to think about Moore being a capable QB
He needs to show that he can do it in the traditional sense… Under center, dropping back, looking off the D, going through reads, checking down, stepping into his throws, and being accurate. If this is too much to ask of him then we need to move on. Bottom line
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
Ye or Ne anyone?
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
Ne.
Jim Kelly was brought into the conversation awhile ago, and it’s a good comparison.
Kelly got into the HOF by successfully running the K-gun offense, pretty much what I’m advocating. You don’t have to be a traditional QB, in the restricted sense you’re describing, to be successful.
but dude Kelly was beast
he was in “The Greatest Game No One Ever Saw” or whatever it was called….ridiculous stats. He could throw a football.
seriously though Kelly was a monster
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
Reliability
Another question to ask is if the coaching staff is willing to put the ball in Matt Moore’s hands and say, you are going to throw the ball 40+ times this game. Be accurate, don’t turn it over, but don’t be afraid to pull the trigger.
If we see a few three and outs what kind of hole will we be putting our defense in against the Saints offense on a short field?
Just playing Devil’s Advocate
No way he doesn't turn the ball over. It's part of his make up.
Like I said, he’s basically Jake Delhomme. He’ll chance his arm and make a few plays, but he’ll also give the opposition plenty of chances to take the ball away.
Honestly, I don’t think he’s the only problem with the offence, but we have somebody better on the bench and we should be using him with an eye on the future.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
That's being too hard on Jake.
In all seriousness, Matt is closer to Rex Grossman than Jake Delhomme.
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
depends on what year you are talking about
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
Not really.
Jake was a time tested, proven winner. Matt is not. There’s no doubt that Jake lost his mojo toward the end but that doesn’t mean he was never a good QB. Rex Grossman is, and always has been, a human turnover machine. So is Matt Moore.
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
That's exactly what Jake Delhomme was.
In his prime he happened to have one of the best WRs in the game to throw to. A guy that bailed him out every week.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
Bullshit.
Jake was 100 times better than Matt Moore will ever be. You are judging Jake only by his last season.
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
In my opinion the only difference between the two is that Delhomme didn't crumble under pressure.
"Nah, you look like Elijah Wood." - danmerqury
You are entitled to that opinion.
I happen to disagree, but I know plenty of folks that are with you so we’ll just leave it here. It’s not really relevant anyway.
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
Moore doesn't "crumble under pressure"
The hurry up offense, managing the clock in late game situations, 26/34 in those 10 minutes of crunch time – that’s pressure, and he didn’t “crumble” under it.
Not a bad idea
Essentially, you are asking Fox and/or Davidson to get out of the way of the offense. I’m sure that the majority of CSR will agree that the play-calling has been crap. So, I say not a bad idea.
Problems:
1. Fox and Davidson probably would not like the idea of stepping out of the way for Moore, given that they are both looking for jobs next season. Yielding to Moore would be an embarrassment for them. Fox will still get a job, but perhaps he won’t get the job he really wants or the offer he is looking for. Davidson may have bigger problems.
2. Assuming we get over point 1, which is a major hurdle, I can only see us win one game using this strategy. Indeed, it is possible that Matt Moore comes out firing in the first half against the Saints in the no-huddle only to have Greg Williams out-think him in the second half. Unlike us, most teams adjust to what they see on the field and are able to make adjustments quickly. The likes of Manning can react to adjustments – I don’t think Moore is that good yet.
That said, it’s a worth a shot. Heck, it’s worth more than one shot. How can it not be, if it means that Fox/Davidson are not calling the plays? Just don’t think Fox and Davidson would want that to happen.
by pieterzen on Nov 3, 2010 9:43 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
The OC still calls plays
They just give the QB 4-8 options to call at the line and adjust accordingly.
I agree with all of THIS
rec
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
Your post makes me wonder why there'a all this resistance to the idea.
“It’s worth a shot.”
Geez, a lot of posters don’t want to take that shot, I guess. I further guess they’re so happy with our presently impotent offense that they don’t want to take the Viagra I’m offering them. (Bet that merits a pic!)
If 1-6 makes you guys happy, enjoy it.
You know why there's resistance? It's not resistance to the hurry-up, it's resistance to anything Matt Moore.
Two words:
Jimmy Clausen.
And he is not Matt Moore.
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
to clarify, I've been in favor of Moore playing since October 2009. Not a Clausen proponent, yet.
I’m just telling you why people are apprehensive….because your plan involves MM as the starting QB.
"If you ask Jets' CB Darrelle Revis, there is no one who is harder to cover one-on-one than Steve Smith. That has to mean something coming from last year's runner-up for Defensive Player of the Year."
Indeed..
It’s “screw this season, give me Clausen and prepare for next year” vs “Matt Moore is a good QB in a bad situation and a bad system” vs “lets do it, anything’s worth a shot because what we’re doing isn’t working for various reasons” vs “oooooh Top Cats” in a four way battle royal. If I were making predictions, I’m split between two…
“oooooh, Top Cats”, “lets do it”.
The Carolina Panthers are the best team in the NFL, except on Sundays.
Sounds good to me.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
You asked for it...
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
I figured I'd keep it clean.
Besides, if you look at the picture Tater so kindly blessed us with above, Viagra wouldn’t even be necessary.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
My feeling
A lot of people have given up on Matt Moore. They may be too hasty regarding this but who knows…yet this is not surprising.
1. People gave up on Matt Moore after the Tampa Bay game.
2. They gave up on Clausen after the Bears game.
3. They got high on Matt Moore after the first win of the season against the 49ers (this really shocked me because of what we had seen so far)..
4. They then gave up on Matt Moore after they lost to the Rams (very good defense and an efficient offense)
The starting QB has a binary existence – he is either glorified for the Panthers winning or vilified for the Panthers losing.
And it’s not about Jimmy Clausen.
- People want Tony Pike (the argument being: he can’t be as bad as Moore/Clausen when
we KNOW that the QB is not the biggest issue).
- People want Armanti Edwards (even though he has been learning a new position for 6 months now)
- People want Andrew Luck. Cam Newton, Colin Kapernick (I hate looking ahead to the draft right now).
Why hate on Moore so much?
He is still a very inexperienced player. He has shown me in a brief period, that he has the tools to be a great quarterback. If you are all up on Jimmy Clausen, I’m not sure you watched the preseason, this season, or his college career. I’ve NEVER seen a qb fumble snaps so much. He is about as mobile as the chrysler building. His football iq may be high, but so is Ron Meeks. I don’t want to see Ron Meek’s out there qb’ing, though I think he’d be better than Clausen. People bagged on Armanti Edwards, because he played weaker college opponents. Well, he did something Jimmy didn’t do…WON GAMES! I don’t care about stats…can you win games. Matt Moore has, Jimmy hasn’t since high school. He’s JUST like his brothers and I’m sick of people saying he’s the future and not Matt Moore. If he’s the future, I sure hope the next coach doesn’t think so.
Another look at Moore's Stat line
After I noticed some inconsistencies in bigd’s numbers, I decided to give another take on his overall stat line. My results come up a little bit different…
35/53 for 388 yards, 2 FGs, 3 TDs, 4 INTs, 2 Sack/Fumbles (both recovered)
Here’s my notes for consumption:
Giants:
4/5 for 50 yards, TD
4/10 for 58 yards, INT
0/0, 1 Sack/Fumble, recovered (no I don’t count sacks as passing plays)
Bucs:
Nothing
Bears:
0/2 for 0 yards, INT
4/6 for 35 yards, INT
49ers:
7/8 for 69 yards, TD
1/1 for 35 yards, FG
Rams:
5/6 for 43 yards, FG
7/11 for 84 yards, TD, 1 sack/Fumble, recovered
3/4 for 14 yards, INT
Come on... really?
Typically I’d have something to put here but I’m honest-to-God baffled by what you just typed. Let me try to this get rolling and see where it goes… Ace apparently found some alternative stats and posted them to be compared and discussed here, in a discussion founded by BigD regarding the same matter. Regardless of his intent, I personally like both stat lines (his and BigD’s). I don’t know if he’s trying to say Moore is better or worse than what BigD outlined in the article (or neither, he could just be sharing the difference he came up with) but I’d take either over what is being produced otherwise.
You completely ignore everything posted by Ace, as well as BigD’s original article (they’re both presenting the same argument, rather one side or the other), by saying he’s “still throwing picks”. Please, inform me of the QB that has thrown any reasonable amount of passes this season that hasn’t thrown a pick? If you’re waiting for the QB that doesn’t get intercepted, have fun at the bus stop. Dress lightly and bring a thick blanket, this way you’ll be prepared for many summers and winters. If you really want to grasp here, we’ll go with Vick and his 96 pass attempts/no interceptions. You can save the research because he’s the only one and, even at that, he doesn’t qualify based on the NFL’s 14 passes per game criteria. That’s not the part that left me speechless, though. Turn-overs are a part of the game and, as a team, we’ve definitely been battling with them this year.
It’s the way you end your sentence that leaves me floored. “so whats your point”… If you can’t see the point that has been beaten to death many times over then I can only assume you’re not here to have an open minded discussion but to bash Moore at any given opportunity that presents itself. You’re free to express your opinion, that being the dismay you have for Moore’s amount of turn-overs, but please don’t act like anyone that doesn’t agree with you has wasted their time and doesn’t even have a point to present. If anything, the only points in this discussion that were not well defined are yours. You didn’t break down the picks, you didn’t examine what lead to them or how they happened, you didn’t explain which were or were not critical to the loss of a game, I mean, you really didn’t do much of anything but attempt to make Ace feel like he was wasting his time. The beauty of it all is that you do not have to do all or any of that when posting opinions and engaging in discussions around here, all contributions, big or small, are welcomed because they help the community thrive. But… if you’re going to start belittling people that have done such (as has been done multiple times throughout the entire discussion, not just specifically this time) and disregarding their points entirely, you may be asked to provide a good reason why you’ve done so.
“I’m still worried that, even in the hurry up, Matt Moore will continue to throw picks.” – What does your sentence say that mine does not? It says no more, nor any less.
I’m sure you’re wondering who the F am I to be interjecting with what has turned out to be something of a lecture (I am sorry, I do not intend for it to be such), I just hate to see valid points and discussions thrown off course and dismissed with such one-liners. We’re all guilty at some point in time but with guilt comes the opportunity to come clean and start anew. I’ve personally been putting a lot of effort into staying on discussion and not dismissing others opinions when providing my own. It can be difficult at times (it’s hard to convey emotion in text, misunderstandings are inevitable but it’s how they are handled that is key) but this place is so much better when there’s more discussion and less fighting (I say fighting, and not arguing, because it sometimes seems that if we were at a round table discussing Panther football and enjoying some beer, there’d be some brawls before all settled down and bought everyone another beer ;). Of course, in this fantasy CSR land, beer is free, so “bought” may not be an appropriate word). While it was your post that triggered this, I hope you know this isn’t all specifically for you but hopefully something everyone can take from.
To quote Z-Ro…
“I’m guilty just like everybody else cause when I’m talkin to ya’ll I’m talkin to self.”
Go Panthers!
The Carolina Panthers are the best team in the NFL, except on Sundays.
by D-Ranged1 on Nov 4, 2010 4:45 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
If you can’t see the point that has been beaten to death many times over then I can only assume you’re not here to have an open minded discussion but to bash Moore at any given opportunity that presents itself.
I agree with this. It seems that he is only here to bash Moore, because Tater, Ace, Big D, and myself have all brought to his attention the points of this article and subsequent comment thread, and have given him the counterpoints to his arguments, even though he has yet to acknowledge it, and he continues his “so what’s your point” nonsense that equates to a 5 year old’s attitude when he doesn’t get his favorite crayon in art class.
I gave up trying to discuss the issue with him because sometimes it just gets to a point where there’s really no incentive to try anymore. He’s going to be obstinate about it because he hates MM for whatever reason, and I don’t feel like trying to discuss the topic that Big D put so much research into with him because he just doesn’t get it, and based on his comments throughout this thread he doesn’t respect the fact that Big D put so much effort into his article.
…this place is so much better when there’s more discussion and less fighting.
I couldn’t agree more. I get tired of all the fights and pissing contests that get started here, to the point where I almost decide to vacate my spot as editor and stop coming to the site at all because I just get tired of seeing everyone at each others’ throats over petty things like who the QB is, or whether or not [insert player here] should start or get cut or whatever.
I love a good, fact-based debate just as much as anyone, but these debates almost always seem to turn into full-fledged battles between respected members of this community, and it sucks because that’s not what this place is about. This place is supposed to be a place where we can come in, kick back, and enjoy talking about the Panthers. It’s not supposed to be a battleground to decide who is the smartest, or who is the best fan, and when it starts leaning that way it just frustrates me because that’s not what this place is supposed to be like.
But anyway, that’s enough of my drivel for one sitting. Great comment, you’ve earned my rec.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
by BW Smith on Nov 4, 2010 5:16 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Here you go sir..
I virtually got you this…
You can also have the virtual beer.
CSR is the best Panthers website in this galaxy. Although, I hear the Andromeda Galaxy has a pretty good one, too.
We must fight to protect our CSR!
The Carolina Panthers are the best team in the NFL, except on Sundays.
by D-Ranged1 on Nov 4, 2010 5:33 PM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
Words cannot express the awesomeness of this comment.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
This thread is beginning to remind me of this......
I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault. -Jack Tatum
Follow me on Twitter
a bit off topic but...
The San Francisco Giants are an example of what we have to look forward to. It’s a different sport I know, but the philosophy is alarmingly similar.
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=ApMJNzbdcJs.NSoFvyvVcIA8R9MF?slug=jp-giantsteambuilding110210&expire=1
This just goes to show what building through the draft and developing within the organization with good scouting will do. This team is young and very mistake prone. A year in the line of fire will make them smarter and tougher. Hold your criticisms for this team for now. I still maintain, THIS team, with Matt Moore, will be a championship caliber team. They just need time and support.
I do believe this team is a championship caliber team
I do not trust it in the hands of Moore at this point. During the offseason I halfway did. A new HC is the missing key though
I am an optimist. It does not seem too much use being anything else.
~Winston Churchill
OH!
A Champ. caliber team has an OL that gets more than a 2" push off the LOS.
If J-Stew is running up the backs of his blockers, as has been stated elsewhere, it’s because he expects (and rightfully so) that they’ll be a driving force ahead of him, with some forward momentum by the time he gets there.
We can’t criticize him one time for dancing around and being indecisive, then when he is decisive, he runs into the brick wall that his his own masons have helped erect. Or…our road graders are churning in the mud.
We may have the skill players of a Champ. team, but not that caliber of the grunts that you need to get the job done.
Your last sentence says it all Big D.
We need the big fat fatties to step up and get the job done, or we will continue to fail miserably on offense.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
Not excusing the OLine by any means
but they’re job isn’t made any easier by the fact that we can’t get our passing game going despite them bringing the house.
And we can't get our passing game going primarily because of the OL
If they can’t hold the fort long enough for someone to get open, then the passing game will never work.
Of course, it would be nice if we had an OC who could see this and would call a short passing route to compensate for the failures of the OL, instead of sending Smitty, Gettis, and LaFell on 30 yard deep routes every time, because no QB would have time enough in the pocket to complete the pass when he’s hit by a blitzer in 2 seconds, long before the routes can develop and the receivers can get open.
Oh, how glorious it would be if we only had an OC who had one scintilla of common sense when it comes to play-calling.
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
Oh trust me I know
I’m more than well aware, hell I made that whole post on the topic to illuminate the subject. We aren’t making defenses pay for bringing pressure against the Oline, so they continue to do it.
It’s a perfect storm. If we started nickle-and-diming defenses the way the Rams did to us, we might start to see some of that pressure let up. Now whether we can do that or not is a different discussion altogether.
Just to play Devil's Advocate on this point
The OL are terrible, no doubt… however, I don’t know if we can justify hanging most of it on them.
The Panthers rank 24th in the NFL in sacks allowed (21), and 28th in QB hits allowed (47). Combined pressures = 68
Yet we rank 31st in passing offense. Care to know who gives up more sacks and QB hits than we do?
- Washington (73 total pressures): Passing ranking is 14th
- Chicago (84 total pressures): Passing ranking is 19th
Now some teams that are close to us:
- San Francisco (64 total pressures): Passing ranking is 17th
- Denver Broncos (57 total pressures): Passing ranking is 4th
I don’t know if we can say it’s primarily because of the OL… because I feel that if it was we’d see other teams have a similar correlation between QB pressures and passing failure from guys not holding their blocks. I’m not saying it isn’t part of the problem, but I think there’s something more than that; most likely the play calling.
Follow me on Twitter! @James_Dator
by James Dator on Nov 4, 2010 8:36 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
…most likely the play calling.
Winner Winner, Chicken Dinner. :-)
"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." ~ David Foster Wallace
I think it's a triumvirate
- Bad playcalling
- Bad blocking
- Bad play at the QB position
Each leans on each other. If the play calling is bad, then the QB isn’t in a position to succeed, if the blocking is bad it limits the play calling options and success the QB can have and if the QB fails it limits the play calling and the OL doesn’t matter
Follow me on Twitter! @James_Dator
by James Dator on Nov 4, 2010 9:44 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Triumvirate + 1.
Must add the drops and wrong routes that the inexperienced (but learning) young WRs have added to the equation. Smith has done that a lot, too, lately, but I expect him to correct it by focusing better. His recent comments show he’ll try to.
Which leads me to say something about him: few players, especially WRs!, take personal responsibility for their mistakes like Smitty does. Gotta love him for that. In a game in which he catches 9 balls, and meets one of his goals of 600 career receptions, he only talks about his bad route, his drop, his fumble.
Extenuating Circumstances
Chicago has Mike Martz. This means lots of yardage and lots of sacks.
Redskins have had an extra game and also average 3 more attempts per game.
Broncos have had an extra game and also average 7 more attempts per game.
49ers have had an extra game and also average 2 more attempts per game.
Based on the above, I don’t think other teams have OL issues like we do. That said, I agree about the play-calling.
Passing yards are an average... extra games don't matter
There’s also a reason they are getting extra pass attempts… they’re moving the chains; which we aren’t
Follow me on Twitter! @James_Dator
That being said
I agree on Martz… but that falls on the play calling/scheme right?
Follow me on Twitter! @James_Dator
Pressures are not averages right?
If you looked at average pressures (per attempt) you would get a better idea of how good the OL is.
I agree that extra pass attempts probably mean they are moving the chain. It could also mean that the offense is pass-heavy. Regardless, if you want to look at how the OL is doing, you look at the average pressure.
Another thought
If the QB is holding the ball for 5 seconds, then you can’t blame the OL for pressures or sacks.
I like looking at stats but sometimes in sports, you have to go with what you see. I see terribly play-calling as being the primary issue. With better play-calling, our entire offensive unit improves.
It comes out in the wash honestly.
All these teams face the same problems and the same conditions. That’s why you need context for the stats, but they still do have some meaning.
Now I get where you're coming from... yeah, the pressures are not an average. So... here is the average:
Panthers: 9.7 per game
Washington: 9.1 per game
Chicago: 10.5 per game
Denver: 7.1 per game
San Francisco: 8 per game
So yes, you’re right… but in the case of Carolina v. Denver the difference is 2.6 pressures and 130 yards per game. That’s still a big disparity.
And again, I agree with the QB holding the ball too long stat. I’m showing precisely that. Other teams have allowed comparable QB pressures, but have MUCH greater passing statistics.
As for the heavy comment:
- Panthers rank 21st (32.6 attempts)
Better offense, less attempts
- Bears (30.7 attempts)
SF average just 2 attempts more, Denver average 7 more.
Follow me on Twitter! @James_Dator
Thanks
If you look at attempt per pressure, Denver has 5.56 passes per pressure, Panthers have 3.36 passes per pressure.
Possible conclusions:
- The OL not blocking well enough
- The QBs holding the ball for too long
- The WRs not getting open
- We call too many slow-developing plays
- All of the above
I think our coaches deserve a lot of crap for this. I think they should be able to game-around most of this.
Our pressures come from one thing: blocking.
I’ve times Moore over and over. He doesn’t hold it too long. This automatically takes the WRs out of the equation; he’s thrown it whether they’re open or not. If they run the wrong pattern, or drop it, it’s irrelevant to pressures. Same with slow-developing plays. If we were dissecting why it takes Moore to get rid of it in 4 seconds, all of the above could be partially responsible for that – but that’s NOT the case (ever), so pressures (ergo) can only be caused by inadequate blocking protection.
If you look at the cocoon of protection that a good O-Line constructs and manintains around their QB, it's night and day from the shifting sands that Moore (or Clausen) have had to negotiate around.
Colts, Chiefs, Ravens, Jets, Dolphins, and others – their QBs are seldom threatened by pressures or hits or sacks. Hell, even when I watch Vince Young, it looks like the cone of silence has been erected around, as he stands there, unperturbed, looking for his open receiver.
Moore is quite accurate when unhurried. I’ve shown that to be true when he’s in the no hurry offense (ironically, when we hurry, he’s not hurried.) Think about that statement. It’s not a misprint.
LOL!
Sorry Steven, I have to believe you more than halfway thought it. ;)
by Flowing Willow on Nov 5, 2010 8:15 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Cat Scratch Reader
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Report: Tebow sends cease and desist letter to maker of Jesus-y Jets T-shirts
- Joe McKnight says too much McDonald’s helped him gain 16 pounds in offseason
- Nick Mangold says goodbye to some chest hair on ‘Late Night with Jimmy Fallon’
- Saints will honor suspended Sean Payton with empty chairs
- Junior Seau’s home burglarized just days after his death
