Systems QB and the current system QB

[junk]

Just a thought I had. We have been discussing system QBs. I think BP and Co. implemented a system built on Carter's strengths last year. (Dont know what you would classify it as). Dedicated to the run, play action, only reading 1/2 - 1/3 of the field, the designed rollouts, I think it was put together to try to maximize QC's abilities. I think it was fairly simple and beat into the team's head during TC so that they could execute it well on a consistent basis.

This seemed to have a fair deal of success early in the season. However, I think defenses eventually caught up with this simple offense and learned to defend it. The individual players abilities (Hambrick, Carter, OL, WRs) were not good enough to consistently overcome this. As a result, the offense tailed off as the season wore on.

I think one of the keys in QC's development is his ability to absorb more offensive responsibilities. Depending upon how much more he can take on in the offseason and how much BP and Co. are able to add to the offense could go a long ways towards offensive success in 04.

So my questions regarding this? Do you agree that BP and Co. implemented a system built around QC's strengths? Do you agree to take the next step forward in his development, QC must be able to absorb (and execute) an expanded offense?

[Kangaroo]

What about the oline adjusting the qb the rb;s the wr routes changed and they have new motion differnt terminology

Was it all for QC or was it all for the team itself.

How many slant routes did the wr run not as many as you like because we did not have a wr that could come of a jam and use his body to shield on the slant and get just enough speration fpr a pass

I say it was not just a QC thing but a total offense

Also as the season went on when we ran a play action pass no one but the deadskins would bite on it. Yet the offense was built on play action passing makes it a little harder as well.

Everyone just dropped 7 people into coverage and let their front 4 hambone's shoe strings and that hughe blade of grass control the running game ;) (yes lots of exaggeration)

[jterrell]

Just a thought I had. We have been discussing system QBs. I think BP and Co. implemented a system built on Carter's strengths last year. (Dont know what you would classify it as). Dedicated to the run, play action, only reading 1/2 - 1/3 of the field, the designed rollouts, I think it was put together to try to maximize QC's abilities. I think it was fairly simple and beat into the team's head during TC so that they could execute it well on a consistent basis.

This seemed to have a fair deal of success early in the season. However, I think defenses eventually caught up with this simple offense and learned to defend it. The individual players abilities (Hambrick, Carter, OL, WRs) were not good enough to consistently overcome this. As a result, the offense tailed off as the season wore on.

I think one of the keys in QC's development is his ability to absorb more offensive responsibilities. Depending upon how much more he can take on in the offseason and how much BP and Co. are able to add to the offense could go a long ways towards offensive success in 04.

So my questions regarding this? Do you agree that BP and Co. implemented a system built around QC's strengths? Do you agree to take the next step forward in his development, QC must be able to absorb (and execute) an expanded offense?


This is a good thread Junk and hopefully it wont have to be moved by nonsense getting added.

I do think the system was tweaked to fit Carter. More play action and overloads to each side of the field. Obviously QB draws and such were added that helped get key 1st downs.

As the season wore on and the defenses we faced got better BP was even more conservative. The team actually had something to lose and QC was getting too many picks.

I think, like you, that a big key this year and for QC personally is can he grasp the offense better and can he be more accurate when on the move. FWIW I think that key applies to David Carr, Joey Harrington, Drew Brees and to a lesser extent Byron Leftwich(he's already accurate enough).

Dallas obviously doesnt have a finished, polished product at QB. But they do have a workable product as was shown last season in the overall yardage gained and points scored by the offense.

If QC can get to Aikman's level of system mastery we would probably win the Super Bowl. If he can merely get to Donovan McNabb's we likely get 2 playoff wins. If he can only do what he did last season than 10-6 is probably a high water mark.

One of the things that Carter has going for him is he doesnt need max protection schemes. That means Richie and Witten can be in patterns on most passing plays. That means a larger playbook with more options. Vinny may be more accurate and certinaly has a stronger arm but he will have fewer options because he needs 1 or 2 more blockers on virtually every pass play.

[blindzebra]

This is a good thread Junk and hopefully it wont have to be moved by nonsense getting added.

I do think the system was tweaked to fit Carter. More play action and overloads to each side of the field. Obviously QB draws and such were added that helped get key 1st downs.

As the season wore on and the defenses we faced got better BP was even more conservative. The team actually had something to lose and QC was getting too many picks.

I think, like you, that a big key this year and for QC personally is can he grasp the offense better and can he be more accurate when on the move. FWIW I think that key applies to David Carr, Joey Harrington, Drew Brees and to a lesser extent Byron Leftwich(he's already accurate enough).

Dallas obviously doesnt have a finished, polished product at QB. But they do have a workable product as was shown last season in the overall yardage gained and points scored by the offense.

If QC can get to Aikman's level of system mastery we would probably win the Super Bowl. If he can merely get to Donovan McNabb's we likely get 2 playoff wins. If he can only do what he did last season than 10-6 is probably a high water mark.

One of the things that Carter has going for him is he doesnt need max protection schemes. That means Richie and Witten can be in patterns on most passing plays. That means a larger playbook with more options. Vinny may be more accurate and certinaly has a stronger arm but he will have fewer options because he needs 1 or 2 more blockers on virtually every pass play.

Then how come Vinny got sacked 6 times in 198 attempts plus had a yards/per of 6.99. Carter was sacked 37 times in 505 attempts with a 6.54. Had Vinny attempted 505 passes he'd been sacked only 15 times. So either the Jets OL was vastly superior to ours, or Vinny knows how to not get sacked.

[Smashmouth24]

Then how come Vinny got sacked 6 times in 198 attempts plus had a yards/per of 6.99. Carter was sacked 37 times in 505 attempts with a 6.54. Had Vinny attempted 505 passes he'd been sacked only 15 times. So either the Jets OL was vastly superior to ours, or Vinny knows how to not get sacked.

Fair point. Young quarterbacks with scrambling ability take a fair amount of sacks no matter how good their O-line is. Vinny has simply learned two things: 1. He can't scramble and 2. when to throw it away. If the O-line plays to its potential, it is this trait in Testaverde that might vault him into the starting role. Otherwise, though Carter might make the wrong decision holding on to the ball and taking sacks, he could make more plays with a lesser O-line than Vinny given his ability to evade pressure.

[Doomsday101]

Then how come Vinny got sacked 6 times in 198 attempts plus had a yards/per of 6.99. Carter was sacked 37 times in 505 attempts with a 6.54. Had Vinny attempted 505 passes he'd been sacked only 15 times. So either the Jets OL was vastly superior to ours, or Vinny knows how to not get sacked.

I agree, sacks are not just due to the O-line a good QB can find his targets quickly and get rid of the ball quickly. The Jets offensive line was not that good Vinny did a good job of getting the ball out of there quickly. Add to that Vinny had only 2 ints in the 7 games he played and hit 62% of his passes so he was not just throwing the ball away to avoid sacks. Now look at the more mobil Pennington who was sacked 25 time in 10 games behind that same offensive line. I will agree that our O-line needs to improve but not all sacks are because of the O-line

[twa]

In my opinion scramblin is overated unless you are vick,mcnabb or mcnair when healthy.My point is unless you are actuallly running for yardage,not running around to buy time you are setting yourself up for a pick or a sack.Good pockect presense along with a little mobility will allow a qb to work with his blockers to buy time in a more controled manner.the problem I see with Q scambling is in avoiding the rush he will loose track of the defenders and Allow his passing mechanics to slip,resulting in to's and bad passes.

[blindzebra]

I agree, sacks are not just due to the O-line a good QB can find his targets quickly and get rid of the ball quickly. The Jets offensive line was not that good Vinny did a good job of getting the ball out of there quickly. Add to that Vinny had only 2 ints in the 7 games he played and hit 62% of his passes so he was not just throwing the ball away to avoid sacks. Now look at the more mobil Pennington who was sacked 25 time in 10 games behind that same offensive line. I will agree that our O-line needs to improve but not all sacks are because of the O-line

Too bad us "haters" never do anything but make baseless arguements with nothing to back it up. ;)

[Doomsday101]

Too bad us "haters" never do anything but make baseless arguements with nothing to back it up. ;)

I agree, we will get blasted for posting stats yet I find it funny that good QB and good stats tend to go hand in hand. I have never seen a QB have a great year yet have poor stats. Stats are a by product of your performance for good or bad. I have never seen a guy post a QB rating of 80 or higher look bad in doing it.

[Rack Bauer]

So my questions regarding this? Do you agree that BP and Co. implemented a system built around QC's strengths?


I think BP and Co. implemented a system that took advantage of ALL our offensive personell. Not just the QB. One reason we did a lot of play action was to try and help our WRs get open deep (none of them were/are very good at getting open in the middle on short to medium routes).

The reading 1/3 - 1/2 of the field thing is a myth thought up by commentators. I never once heard BP say he built the offense that way. I often saw QC look off one WR on one side of the field and end up throwing to a WR to the other side of the field. I won't even get any further into this cuz no one has any proof for or against this claim.

One thing that REALLY hurt our offense was that we had a crappy RB. At the beginning of the season our passing game was wide open cuz teams were playing a safety in the box to help stop the run. They then realized it wasn't necessary to stop the horse we had in our back field. That enabled them to take away the best part of our offense... deep passing. And since QC didn't pick anyone apart with short-medium passes, plus our WRs weren't built to work the middle of the field, it really hurt our passing game. Not only does our Running game need to get better to open up the passing game, but QC has to be more accurate on the short passes so that teams can't just play 2 deep the times when our running game is struggling. Plus our WRs have to be willing to work the middle of the field. Keyshawn should help a lot in this area.


And on top of all I just wrote, the OL has to be better then it was last year. I think we'll be better (or at least just as good) at LT, LG, and C. RG should also be at least just as good. The big question mark is at RT. We really need someone to step up and be solid there.

[junk]

The reading 1/3 - 1/2 of the field thing is a myth thought up by commentators. I never once heard BP say he built the offense that way. I often saw QC look off one WR on one side of the field and end up throwing to a WR to the other side of the field. I won't even get any further into this cuz no one has any proof for or against this claim.


Not a myth. I rarely post something I have not read or seen myself. I felt QC rarely, if ever, looked backside.

http://articles.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1208/is_46_227/ai_110314527

The genius of Parcells, the on-field coach, is to recognize the limitations of his players and fit a system to their skills. The Cowboys understand Carter is not an accomplished quarterback with complete skills. So he is asked to read just half, or a third, of the field on passes. It allows him to make quicker decisions; the goal is to control his mistakes, give him confidence. The Cowboys rely heavily on play-action, which slows the pass rush, decoys the linebackers and buys Carter time. They also benefit from Parcells' creative and vastly underrated play calling. He has a great feel for the game and its management, with multiple formations and tactics tweaked for each opponent.

[Doomsday101]

Not a myth. I rarely post something I have not read or seen myself. I felt QC rarely, if ever, looked backside.

http://articles.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1208/is_46_227/ai_110314527

The genius of Parcells, the on-field coach, is to recognize the limitations of his players and fit a system to their skills. The Cowboys understand Carter is not an accomplished quarterback with complete skills. So he is asked to read just half, or a third, of the field on passes. It allows him to make quicker decisions; the goal is to control his mistakes, give him confidence. The Cowboys rely heavily on play-action, which slows the pass rush, decoys the linebackers and buys Carter time. They also benefit from Parcells' creative and vastly underrated play calling. He has a great feel for the game and its management, with multiple formations and tactics tweaked for each opponent.

Thanks for posting that artical this what many of us have been saying for a while now. It is not a matter of hating or picking on Carter it is more of a true break down of his play. This is not to say he can't improve these things even though many of us have doubts that he can or will.

[ChrisFul]

Here we go.....

You know, I don't buy the critique that Carter reads only 1/2 or 1/3 of the field on every play. It's not like every passing play was a designed rollout or overloaded one side of the field with recievers. Does he do it more than other QBs? Sure, I'd be willing to bet he does; he was raw in the first place and he's young. Is it because he's stupid or somehow mentally deficient when it comes to football? I don't think so. Yet whenever this is mentioned, it's ALWAYS in this context.

[Doomsday101]

Here we go.....

You know, I don't buy the critique that Carter reads only 1/2 or 1/3 of the field on every play. It's not like every passing play was a designed rollout or overloaded one side of the field with recievers. Does he do it more than other QBs? Sure, I'd be willing to bet he does; he was raw in the first place and he's young. Is it because he's stupid or somehow mentally deficient when it comes to football? I don't think so. Yet whenever this is mentioned, it's ALWAYS in this context.

Did not say that I felt Carter was stupid. I think he is a hard worker and willing to put in the extra time but unless is shows up on the field then it does not matter how hard you work. He will once again have the oppertunity to prove himself I think he has to make the most of it this time around and not just based on team achivments but personal improvement in his game.

[MichaelWinicki]

Here we go.....

You know, I don't buy the critique that Carter reads only 1/2 or 1/3 of the field on every play. It's not like every passing play was a designed rollout or overloaded one side of the field with receivers. Does he do it more than other QBs? Sure, I'd be willing to bet he does; he was raw in the first place and he's young. Is it because he's stupid or somehow mentally deficient when it comes to football? I don't think so. Yet whenever this is mentioned, it's ALWAYS in this context.

I run hot & cold on Quincy. Lately mostly cold.

I don't view any deficiencies he has as the result of "stupidity". I question his overall ability to be a high-quality starting QB in the NFL. Just because someone plays QB in the NFL doesn't automatically guarantee he'll be one of the top 10 in the league on a consistent basis.

I honestly don't know what Quincy's "max point" is. Or how good can he be. No one does--for sure. And that's why Vinny and Henson were brought in. This is the crux of the whole argument both "for" and "against". The lovers see more potential that hasn't been tapped. The haters see him hitting a wall at this point with limited upside.

Soon we'll all know the answer and then the Cowboys will either move on to Henson in '05 or Q will still be the starter. Heck if he has a completion percentage of 60%, has 20 TD's, 15 picks, throws for 3,600 yards even I would have to say "he's made it".

As far as the above argument goes, I think any coach would have to be stupid not to tailor the offense around the strengths/weaknesses of the players involved. And yes we've see some stupid offensive coordinators in Dallas the last few years.

[Doomsday101]

I run hot & cold on Quincy. Lately mostly cold.

I don't view any deficiencies he has as the result of "stupidity". I question his overall ability to be a high-quality starting QB in the NFL. Just because someone plays QB in the NFL doesn't automatically guarantee he'll be one of the top 10 in the league on a consistent basis.

I honestly don't know what Quincy's "max point" is. Or how good can he be. No one does--for sure. And that's why Vinny and Henson were brought in. This is the crux of the whole argument both "for" and "against". The lovers see more potential that hasn't been tapped. The haters see him hitting a wall at this point with limited upside.

Soon we'll all know the answer and then the Cowboys will either move on to Henson in '05 or Q will still be the starter. Heck if he has a completion percentage of 60%, has 20 TD's, 15 picks, throws for 3,600 yards even I would have to say "he's made it".

As far as the above argument goes, I think any coach would have to be stupid not to tailor the offense around the strengths/weaknesses of the players involved. And yes we've see some stupid offensive coordinators in Dallas the last few years.

I agree with you and quite honestly I would happy even if he had fewer that 20 TD as long as he has a lot less ints. In a Ball control offense making mental mistakes and turning the ball is something he can not continue to do. They are not asking him to carry the load they are asking him to control the ball. Heck even if you have to throw it away and end up punting at least your putting the other team at the other end of the field and not giving them a short field to work with

[kidcrook]

If Julius Jones proves to be a true running back you will see a change in play calling. All Jones has to do is be a threat and the playbook will open up with Carter looking like a real QB. I would not be surprised if we start to see more of Carter's true playmaking ability b/c he has to have it. If not then why was he drafted?

[Doomsday101]

If Julius Jones proves to be a true running back you will see a change in play calling. All Jones has to do is be a threat and the playbook will open up with Carter looking like a real QB. I would not be surprised if we start to see more of Carter's true playmaking ability b/c he has to have it. If not then why was he drafted?


I hope your right but face it there are more QB's who have entered the NFL and failed than those who have went on to good or great careers. Just because a QB is drafted does not mean he is going to make it in this league regardless if your drafted #1 over all or the last guy taken.

[Nors]

Then how come Vinny got sacked 6 times in 198 attempts plus had a yards/per of 6.99. Carter was sacked 37 times in 505 attempts with a 6.54. Had Vinny attempted 505 passes he'd been sacked only 15 times. So either the Jets OL was vastly superior to ours, or Vinny knows how to not get sacked.

I think 37 Behind a terrible line is average. Also check out Elways 3rd year stats. Elway is in my opinion the greatest QB to ever play the game. I think the fans are overly harsh on Quincy only 3 years into the league. :D




http://www.elway.org/elwaystats.html

[Juke99]

If Julius Jones proves to be a true running back you will see a change in play calling. All Jones has to do is be a threat and the playbook will open up with Carter looking like a real QB. I would not be surprised if we start to see more of Carter's true playmaking ability b/c he has to have it. If not then why was he drafted?

Simple two word answer for this question: Jerry Jones. :)

[Nors]

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/playerStats?categoryId=70407

Vinnie learned the hard way in the NFL! 35 inters second season! His sack totals throughout career are more comparable than 2003 skewed results. Also noted that as QB's get more experienced Interceptions and Sacks will come down.

[Juke99]

I think 37 Behind a terrible line is average. Also check out Elways 3rd year stats. Elway is in my opinion the greatest QB to ever play the game. I think the fans are overly harsh on Quincy only 3 years into the league. :D

Since I am sure it is a shortcoming on my part, can you explain the relevance of citing someone else's stats as some kind of foundation for an explanation (perhaps excuse) for QC's performance?

Can I simply respond "Look at Dan Marino's stats for his first three years" and end the discussion?

Could I have tried out for the Yankees a few years ago with the explanation "Look at how well Nolan Ryan pitched in his mid 40's"

I see no relevance.

Each case is an individual case.

Yes, there are some general rules that apply....QB's take a longer time to develop than other positions..but to in any way compare Carter to John Elway, in my eyes, is kinda silly.

[Doomsday101]

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/playerStats?categoryId=70407

Vinnie learned the hard way in the NFL! 35 inters second season! His sack totals throughout career are more comparable than 2003 skewed results. Also noted that as QB's get more experienced Interceptions and Sacks will come down.


That is true but it also cost Vinny his job now didn't it? teams are not going to wait 5,6 or 7 years to see if a guy is going to finally get it and that was before salery caps and FA. That time line is shorter today than it was when Vinny was a rookie

[Nors]

http://members.aol.com/bluekate/troybio_stats.htm

Interesting trend - he got killed first 3-4 years
But as we started winning his sacks were in teens and 20's.

You can make a case if we can get our QB's sacks down by 15 or so this year we can elevate team. This may be a key indicator to watch upcoming season. I believe thats exactly why BP went in draft RB, RT, RG.

Upgrade line, upgrade running attack will result in less sacks.

I'm a fixin to get this season going!

[Nors]

That is true but it also cost Vinny his job now didn't it? teams are not going to wait 5,6 or 7 years to see if a guy is going to finally get it and that was before salery caps and FA. That time line is shorter today than it was when Vinny was a rookie

He had a lot of patience with Phil Simms and it payed off. Quincy may to your point move on and have a productive career for another team....... How ironic would that be.

[Doomsday101]

He had a lot of patience with Phil Simms and it payed off. Quincy may to your point move on and have a productive career for another team....... How ironic would that be.

He did? He benched Simms in favor of Scott Burnner who ended up tanking. Simms was playing for Ray Perkins and after his 3rd year Simms was at least doing something Carter still has not done which was throw more TD than Int and that was a pathetic Giants team. In 83 Parcells took over benched Simms after 1 year Simms was once again the starting QB. One last thing Parcells was extreamly hard on Simms even today Parcells has said that when looking back he was a bit too hard on Phil. There were several games I saw Phil and Parcells getting into heated exchanges on the sidelines and Parcells did hold Phil responsiable for poor play by others on the offensive side of the ball, telling Phil more than once that it is his job to lead the offense and to get after those players who were not playing well.

[Nors]

He did? He benched Simms in favor of Scott Burnner who ended up tanking. Simms was playing for Ray Perkins and after his 3rd year Simms was at least doing something Carter still has not done which was throw more TD than Int and that was a pathetic Giants team. In 83 Parcells took over benched Simms after 1 year Simms was once again the starting QB. One last thing Parcells was extreamly hard on Simms even today Parcells has said that when looking back he was a bit too hard on Phil. There were several games I saw Phil and Parcells getting into heated exchanges on the sidelines and Parcells did hold Phil responsiable for poor play by others on the offensive side of the ball, telling Phil more than once that it is his job to lead the offense and to get after those players who were not playing well.

And won the Super Bowl - agreed it took him 5 years to "get it".

[Nors]

CAREER PASSING STATS
Year Team G Cmp Att Pct Yds Yds/Att TD Int Sck Rtg
1999 PHI 12 106 216 49.1 948 4.4 8 7 28 60.1
2000 PHI 16 330 569 58.0 3365 5.9 21 13 45 77.8
2001 PHI 16 285 493 57.8 3233 6.6 25 12 39 84.3
2002 PHI 10 211 361 58.4 2289 6.3 17 6 28 86.0
2003 PHI 16 275 478 57.5 3216 6.7 16 11 43 79.6
Totals: 70 1207 2117 57.0 13051 6.2 87 49 183 79.3

interesting - Mcnabb has very high sack counts

[jterrell]

Then how come Vinny got sacked 6 times in 198 attempts plus had a yards/per of 6.99. Carter was sacked 37 times in 505 attempts with a 6.54. Had Vinny attempted 505 passes he'd been sacked only 15 times. So either the Jets OL was vastly superior to ours, or Vinny knows how to not get sacked.
Perhaps the Jets max protected and Dallas didnt. At least that WAS the case when they played each other.

[Doomsday101]

CAREER PASSING STATS
Year Team G Cmp Att Pct Yds Yds/Att TD Int Sck Rtg
1999 PHI 12 106 216 49.1 948 4.4 8 7 28 60.1
2000 PHI 16 330 569 58.0 3365 5.9 21 13 45 77.8
2001 PHI 16 285 493 57.8 3233 6.6 25 12 39 84.3
2002 PHI 10 211 361 58.4 2289 6.3 17 6 28 86.0
2003 PHI 16 275 478 57.5 3216 6.7 16 11 43 79.6
Totals: 70 1207 2117 57.0 13051 6.2 87 49 183 79.3

interesting - Mcnabb has very high sack counts

McNabb spent a lot of his time running the ball because of his inablity of picking up his WR quickly (and he still does). I hand it to McNabb I don't think the guys is that great of a passer but I do look at him as a leader and from what I have seen with the eagles the offensive players look to McNabb for his leadership qualities. I understand his WR have not been that great but now that he has Owens I think that is one excuses that he no longer has.

[Nors]

Perhaps the Jets max protected and Dallas didnt. At least that WAS the case when they played each other.

But they were 2-7 under Vinnie and turned it around when Pennington returned.

[jterrell]

Not a myth. I rarely post something I have not read or seen myself. I felt QC rarely, if ever, looked backside.

http://articles.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1208/is_46_227/ai_110314527

The genius of Parcells, the on-field coach, is to recognize the limitations of his players and fit a system to their skills. The Cowboys understand Carter is not an accomplished quarterback with complete skills. So he is asked to read just half, or a third, of the field on passes. It allows him to make quicker decisions; the goal is to control his mistakes, give him confidence. The Cowboys rely heavily on play-action, which slows the pass rush, decoys the linebackers and buys Carter time. They also benefit from Parcells' creative and vastly underrated play calling. He has a great feel for the game and its management, with multiple formations and tactics tweaked for each opponent.
More from that article since it is now an authority.

------------------------------

It's almost unfair to expect more from Quincy Carter. He already is the shining symbol of Parcells' reclamation project in Dallas, rebounding from the scrap heap of last season to the starting quarterback of a contending team. He has done it when it seemed his short career might be over, the way he deteriorated a year ago, being benched after the seventh game, when he had four interceptions against the Cardinals, arguing with Jones on the sideline, his personal life marred by immature behavior. He stopped talking both to teammates and his offensive coordinator and blamed everyone but himself for his decline.

But Carter considers the hiring of Parcells a blessing that saved him. "I didn't grow up with a father," he says. "Having a father figure like him around is really special to me. His biggest motto is, 'Who are you? What makes you tick?' He cares about me as a person. He has gotten to know who I am, my desires, my ambitions. I want to show him I appreciate him giving me another opportunity."

So Carter the slacker has become Carter the workaholic. He has doubled the time he spends preparing for games. Now when he drops back, he's no longer in a self described fog. "I was thinking while dropping back last year, but now I'm going through my reads instead," he says. He has repaired his relationship with his teammates, and first-year offensive assistant David Lee has refined his mechanics, particularly shortening his stride to help him throw more with his legs, not just his arm.

------------------

This was just before the paragraph you use as porn.
Carter obviously looked one way then threw to the other side of the field at times. You can use the video offered here for upload by the creator of the Boom video to see that. In my post I noted Dallas tried to overload one side of the field so that Carter would have more reads in one line of vision. They did and it is a standard tactic that is found in many playbooks.

Again this is the issue with Carter haters. Their self value has been so depleted by Carter proving them wrong all last year that they hang on any negative they can find and twist it into the worst possible connotation.

BP says he wants a bus driver turns into QC sucks and all system QBs are horrid.
An offense designed around QC turns into he is unable to think or play.

Its nonsense. Typical extremism and off the charts hatred for a guy who has been a truly great story for the past year or so since BP was hired.

[Doomsday101]

But they were 2-7 under Vinnie and turned it around when Pennington returned.

We were 10-6 with Hambrick running the ball I guess we should have kept him. Vinny threw 7 TD 2 Int and over 60% completion and you want to blame him for the 2-5 start the Jets had? Jets had some problems Vinny was not the problem

[jterrell]

We were 10-6 with Hambrick running the ball I guess we should have kept him. Vinny threw 7 TD 2 Int and over 60% completion and you want to blame him for the 2-5 start the Jets had? Jets had some problems Vinny was not the problem
And Pennington was sacked 25 times yet they won games right?
The TEs and RBs caught passes when Pennginton returned.

I understand this is the evil crushing of dreams of Carter haters to note but Vinny was not highly sought after. He was looked to as a backup, even here.

[jterrell]

Too bad us "haters" never do anything but make baseless arguements with nothing to back it up. ;)
You also stroke each other on forums apparently.

[Doomsday101]

And Pennington was sacked 25 times yet they won games right?
The TEs and RBs caught passes when Pennginton returned.

I understand this is the evil crushing of dreams of Carter haters to note but Vinny was not highly sought after. He was looked to as a backup, even here.

Vinny was hitting the TE and RB as well, please check out his game by game stats. No doubt Pennington is the future of the Jets, he is young and has shown himself to be a more than capiable QB. Vinny was brought in by Parcells in NY to start until Pennington was ready to take over. Here in Dallas Vinny has been promised (no matter how much the Carter love fest crowd want to denie it) a chance to compete for the starters job. Saying publicly he would not have signed with Dallas had Parcells not insured him at least a chance to compete. If Vinny is backup that just means Carter has gone out and won the job by out performing Vinny and I would have no problem with that, but Vinny will be given an oppertunity

[LeonDixson]

This is just my opinion, but I don't think the system was built for QC or to take advantage of his strengths. I think the system is the system BP, MC and SP want to use on a long term basis regardless of the QB. On the contrary, I believe based on Parcell's comments about the short leash that they limited what they tried to do within the system to protect QC's weaknesses. That's what they would have to do for most QBs in their first year of a system, so that's not a bash on QC.

What might be a criticism of QC is the fact that in spite of the efforts to protect his weaknesses he still didn't play well in the 2nd half of the season. Certainly part of that is due to the lack of a supporting cast, but not all of it.

[Nors]

You also stroke each other on forums apparently.

(minimim post rule)

[Nors]

Vinny was hitting the TE and RB as well, please check out his game by game stats. No doubt Pennington is the future of the Jets, he is young and has shown himself to be a more than capiable QB. Vinny was brought in by Parcells in NY to start until Pennington was ready to take over. Here in Dallas Vinny has been promised (no matter how much the Carter love fest crowd want to denie it) a chance to compete for the starters job. Saying publicly he would not have signed with Dallas had Parcells not insured him at least a chance to compete. If Vinny is backup that just means Carter has gone out and won the job by out performing Vinny and I would have no problem with that, but Vinny will be given an oppertunity

Vinnie will be given a shot to start. Let the games begin!

[Doomsday101]

You know guys I have no problem with Carter starting if he shows vast improvement and proves himself to be the best we have. But I refuse to sit here and act like this guy is some type of highly sought after QB. He was not though of highly coming out of college and thus far has shown little to think he will in the future. If he goes out and starts playing some quality football and is making the plays that should be expected out of the QB position then great our problems are over and we can look to a bright future but just because I'm a Cowboy fan does not mean I'm going to hide my head in the sand and just pretend that Carter is the man. It has to be proven, if some want to continually treat Carter as a rookie then fine but I will not do that he is a vet and I expect more than I have seen.

[aikemirv]

Now we have gotten into comparing how many times QC was sacked to McNabb, Elway, Aikman and so forth and that was not what anybody was trying to do.

What people have said is that Vinnie was not mobile enough and would not be able to play behind a poor offensive line because he would take too much of a beating. therefore QC would be the obvious choice to start.

Nobody has said that QC takes too many sacks or that you can't win with him because he takes sacks, yet people must compare him to everyone else to justify his sacks.

Vinnie stats on sacks were not brought up to compare to QC but to show that despite his inability to scramble he does not take many sacks, thus the idea that he will get killed is not correct.

[jterrell]

You know guys I have no problem with Carter starting if he shows vast improvement and proves himself to be the best we have. But I refuse to sit here and act like this guy is some type of highly sought after QB. He was not though of highly coming out of college and thus far has shown little to think he will in the future. If he goes out and starts playing some quality football and is making the plays that should be expected out of the QB position then great our problems are over and we can look to a bright future but just because I'm a Cowboy fan does not mean I'm going to hide my head in the sand and just pretend that Carter is the man. It has to be proven, if some want to continually treat Carter as a rookie then fine but I will not do that he is a vet and I expect more than I have seen.

Carter would have been a 3rd round pick at the worst as Dennis Green told the world.
He isnt an elite QB obviously. Not now and wasnt then. He is also not a scrub now and wasnt then. I understand he bears a great deal of watching because he could go either way. Theres no reason to assume that he fails though. He does have some things working for him that he has yet to have. He will be in the same system which benefits all players and especially QBs. He will have a proven WR who catches lots of passes. He has a 1st day draft pick toting the rock as opposed to a bevy of undrafted free agents and a guy who was out of the league for over 2 years. Any Dallas fan should be supporting the guy and hoping he improves because the team performance hinges on that.

Instead they will tell you other players give us a better chance to win then lampoon the guy when Carter beats him out. When Vinny becomes the backup which is all but guaranteed IMHO, those fans who back him now will claim he is washed up if he couldnt beat out Carter. Its the same old Carter cant beat out any QB, oh wait that QB doesnt count now since Carter him beat him out circular jerk.

I can guarantee you when some player beats out Carter I will be quite supportive and quite hopeful. Now that BP is here we know the best player will play.

[jterrell]

Now we have gotten into comparing how many times QC was sacked to McNabb, Elway, Aikman and so forth and that was not what anybody was trying to do.

What people have said is that Vinnie was not mobile enough and would not be able to play behind a poor offensive line because he would take too much of a beating. therefore QC would be the obvious choice to start.

Nobody has said that QC takes too many sacks or that you can't win with him because he takes sacks, yet people must compare him to everyone else to justify his sacks.

Vinnie stats on sacks were not brought up to compare to QC but to show that despite his inability to scramble he does not take many sacks, thus the idea that he will get killed is not correct.

The problem is what happens when Vinny gets pressure. Does he complete 3 yard passes on 3rd and 6? He did last year against Dallas. The play by play is still up on nfl.com. Vinny does get rid of the ball. He is a savvy vet. He is not a good fit behind a weak OL. He is not at this point a better season long solution than QC. He will likely play some football and play it at a high level but in smallish doses. He is alot to me like Kurt Warner.

[MichaelWinicki]

Since I am sure it is a shortcoming on my part, can you explain the relevance of citing someone else's stats as some kind of foundation for an explanation (perhaps excuse) for QC's performance?

Can I simply respond "Look at Dan Marino's stats for his first three years" and end the discussion?

Could I have tried out for the Yankees a few years ago with the explanation "Look at how well Nolan Ryan pitched in his mid 40's"

I see no relevance.

Each case is an individual case.

Yes, there are some general rules that apply....QB's take a longer time to develop than other positions..but to in any way compare Carter to John Elway, in my eyes, is kinda silly.


Juke,

How dare you come into this forum and try to post things that make sense!

Especially when it concerns Nors.

What are you thinking man?

[Hostile]

I'm not sure how this is going to go over given how things always go when I have broken down mechanics in the past. First of all, EVERY QB who has ever played the game since QBs began to throw to places on the field instead of to the receivers is a system QB. You are throwing within a defined system to the areas drawn up for that purpose.

Sometimes this is called the WCO but in reality all teams use it. Why is it successful? CBs cover WRs, but throws from QBs are made to spots. The WRs break to those spots. This makes the CBs have to react not only to the athlete they are covering but the ball. In the days before this implementation QBs waited for a WR to get open and they threw to the open man. They are still doing this but with a different focus on how to succeed at it.

The position of QB more than any other position in the game is about timing. This was not always the case. The evolution of the forward pass has come from the time when QBs threw to receivers to now where they throw to spots on the field. The throws are the same, the difference is the internal clock and the comfort with the play call and the receiver. That is called chemistry and it is precious. The receiver has to have the faith that the ball is coming where he expects it and the QB has to have faith that the receiver will be there and that he will make the play.

As a general rule QBs have 3, 5, and 7 step drops as well as roll outs. QBs take far fewer sacks in 3 step drops than the do in the other 3 choices. The obvious answer is that the defense has the least amount of time to react. You can even see an occasional 1 step drop where the QB simply turns and throws parallel along the LOS to a receiver. I don't think I've ever seen a sack on a 1 step drop.

5 step drops are intermediate range designed to give the receivers more time to get open. At the same time the defense is reading the play and they are reacting. In the NFL players can close gaps much faster than in college or High School. We are talking about elite ability athletes after all. In 5 step drops blitzes and pass rushers have more time to get to the QB and consequently QBs take more sacks.

7 step drops are long range plays and take even more time. Which of course gives the defense more time to react and pursue. Teams do not run many 7 step drop plays but the percentage of sacks does go up even if the quantity may not.

Finally roll outs. These take the most time of all which means the defense has the most time to react to the play. On top of this the sideline becomes an ally to the defense as does the opposite side of the field. In other words they have more time to react to the play and they can narrow the containment area significantly. Teams tend to give up a lot of sacks if they roll out a lot. Simply put they are taking more time for the plays to develop and giving the defense more reaction ability and easier coverage.

This is why there was a stat last year that something like 87% of Q's INTs happened when he rolled right. What exactly was happening? Quite simply the CBs and Ss had more time to read the WRs routes and position themselves to defend the play. The D-lines had more time to pursue and contain Q within a certain limited area. Finally they made the containment area smaller. Offensive success percentages go down, defensive success percentages go up. More sacks are possible because they have more time to pursue. More INTs are possible because they have more time to cover tightly and even double up.

Very few QBs who have ever played the game can consistently beat this kind of handicap by throwing back across the field to the area of least containment. It may look easy but it is extremely hard to do. Inertia is taking you to the right and the throwing back to the left means a throw clear across your body. Putting any zip on it is amazing. The longer that ball stays up there, the advantage to the CB goes up. He can react to it.

Statistically the most successful QB in NFL history was Dan Marino. He was a statue. Look back at some of his seasons and he was rarely sacked. I think one season he suffered 4 sacks. Some QBs get that in 1 game. Poor Patrick Ramsey. How was he able to avoid sacks? Quite simple, he had an internal clock that told him he had X amount of time to release the ball to avoid the sack. On top of this he was very accurate and had a strong arm. When you put those things together you get great stats, few sacks, and a legendary QB.

Accuracy and timing are the keys. Accuracy cannot be under rated. That is why Troy Aikman gets the praise that he does. If you are looking for a picture perfect pass to teach he very well might be the example. Other QBs had better skills but not better accuracy. When he was on, quite simply that made the whole offense hard to deal with. You add to this we relied on a running game to set up the pass and it worked to perfection for a long time.

People like to point out that Aikman's numbers faded as his weapons decreased. They rarely acknowledge that at the same time his weapons were decreasing so was the play quality due to poor coaching. Novacek and Harper were guys we all loved as much because of Aikman as anything else. Without him and this system what did they do? Was Novacek an All Pro TE in Arizona? No. Was Harper even decent in Tampa? No.

Give Aikman Parcells system for the final 3 years of his career as opposed to Gailey and Campo and I think the results would have been a lot better. He was good enough to get it done.

Mobility can add a dimension to the offense that makes it hard on a defense but in my opinion they have to be QBs first, runners 2nd, and only when no other option is available. For example, early in his career Steve Young ran too much. He was exciting and dynamic. Remember the run against Minnesota? But what was Walsh saying at that time? That he needed to WAIT for the play to develop. Once he became a passer first the 49ers returned to offensive prominence with him at QB. For those who want a Dallas touch to this, Landry demanded the same of Staubach.

Just recently an article appeared about the Falcons wanting Vick to run less. The reason is clear, they want him to mature as a QB. His running ability is as good as it gets. He needs to learn to trust the plays. If he does this the guy will be dangerous.

All kinds of myths about QBing exist. That you need a running game to offset the passing game. It helps. No doubt about it, but it is not vital. Marino never had a RB to speak of. Tom Brady hasn't until this year. Elway didn't until the end. Moon didn't. Dan Fouts didn't. Each of these men was successful at levels that are legendary. They played the position of QB like artists.

Another myth is the possession WR need myth. When the Rams were scoring 500 points three seasons in a row, Ricky Proehl was the possession WR in their offense. Yet Holt and Bruce along with Faulk were the primary targets. They are NOT possession WRs. They still succeeded.

The reason I am a QB elitist is really as simple as this statement. Quarterbacks who can read and react quickly, then throw accurately, and lead their teams are the ones I think that become legends.

An old cowboy once told me...a man who works with his hands is a laborer. A man who works with his hands and his head is an artisan. A man who works with his hands, his head, and his heart is an artist. I'm looking for an artist again.

One thing cannot be refuted about offense. The better the O-line the better your chances of success. I will never believe otherwise.

[aikemirv]

The problem is what happens when Vinny gets pressure. Does he complete 3 yard passes on 3rd and 6? He did last year against Dallas. The play by play is still up on nfl.com. Vinny does get rid of the ball. He is a savvy vet. He is not a good fit behind a weak OL. He is not at this point a better season long solution than QC. He will likely play some football and play it at a high level but in smallish doses. He is alot to me like Kurt Warner.

Vinnie did not look that great last year IMO either. I am not saying that he will beat out Carter. I was just trying to clarify the point of the stat showing Vinnie does not take sacks.

But I would rather have the 3 yards than a 6 yd sack and:

A lot of the throws that the announcers hammered Vinnie for usually get blamed on the WR for not running the correct distance on the route, but somehow Vinnie got blamed for the decision on the majority of the plays that I saw like that last year. I remember a lot of those plays , not now because I want to justify him being here in Dallas, but because I thought that it was unfair to him at the time.

Every time I watched Vinnie last year he looked like he was always trying to Finesse the ball rather than gunning it in. That is what I did not like about his play. For everyone to say he still has a gun of an arm is a little puzzling to me because he does not show it on the field. Maybe that is because he skills do not fit the WCO he was running, I really don't know.

[MichaelWinicki]

McNabb spent a lot of his time running the ball because of his inablity of picking up his WR quickly (and he still does). I hand it to McNabb I don't think the guys is that great of a passer but I do look at him as a leader and from what I have seen with the eagles the offensive players look to McNabb for his leadership qualities. I understand his WR have not been that great but now that he has Owens I think that is one excuses that he no longer has.


Doom you're being sucked into an argument that is just barely credible to begin with.

Trying to compare one player to another is not difficult, but when you're trying to "shoe-horn" in the argument that the situations around each is identical and that the overall productivity of one will somehow miraculously dictate the future productivity of another... especially in such a team game as football, then the argument becomes almost ridiculous.

[MichaelWinicki]

I'm not sure how this is going to go over given how things always go when I have broken down mechanics in the past. First of all, EVERY QB who has ever played the game since QBs began to throw to places on the field instead of to the receivers is a system QB. You are throwing within a defined system to the areas drawn up for that purpose.

Sometimes this is called the WCO but in reality all teams use it. Why is it successful? CBs cover WRs, but throws from QBs are made to spots. The WRs break to those spots. This makes the CBs have to react not only to the athlete they are covering but the ball. In the days before this implementation QBs waited for a WR to get open and they threw to the open man. They are still doing this but with a different focus on how to succeed at it.

The position of QB more than any other position in the game is about timing. This was not always the case. The evolution of the forward pass has come from the time when QBs threw to receivers to now where they throw to spots on the field. The throws are the same, the difference is the internal clock and the comfort with the play call and the receiver. That is called chemistry and it is precious. The receiver has to have the faith that the ball is coming where he expects it and the QB has to have faith that the receiver will be there and that he will make the play.

As a general rule QBs have 3, 5, and 7 step drops as well as roll outs. QBs take far fewer sacks in 3 step drops than the do in the other 3 choices. The obvious answer is that the defense has the least amount of time to react. You can even see an occasional 1 step drop where the QB simply turns and throws parallel along the LOS to a receiver. I don't think I've ever seen a sack on a 1 step drop.

5 step drops are intermediate range designed to give the receivers more time to get open. At the same time the defense is reading the play and they are reacting. In the NFL players can close gaps much faster than in college or High School. We are talking about elite ability athletes after all. In 5 step drops blitzes and pass rushers have more time to get to the QB and consequently QBs take more sacks.

7 step drops are long range plays and take even more time. Which of course gives the defense more time to react and pursue. Teams do not run many 7 step drop plays but the percentage of sacks does go up even if the quantity may not.

Finally roll outs. These take the most time of all which means the defense has the most time to react to the play. On top of this the sideline becomes an ally to the defense as does the opposite side of the field. In other words they have more time to react to the play and they can narrow the containment area significantly. Teams tend to give up a lot of sacks if they roll out a lot. Simply put they are taking more time for the plays to develop and giving the defense more reaction ability and easier coverage.

This is why there was a stat last year that something like 87% of Q's INTs happened when he rolled right. What exactly was happening? Quite simply the CBs and Ss had more time to read the WRs routes and position themselves to defend the play. The D-lines had more time to pursue and contain Q within a certain limited area. Finally they made the containment area smaller. Offensive success percentages go down, defensive success percentages go up. More sacks are possible because they have more time to pursue. More INTs are possible because they have more time to cover tightly and even double up.

Very few QBs who have ever played the game can consistently beat this kind of handicap by throwing back across the field to the area of least containment. It may look easy but it is extremely hard to do. Inertia is taking you to the right and the throwing back to the left means a throw clear across your body. Putting any zip on it is amazing. The longer that ball stays up there, the advantage to the CB goes up. He can react to it.

Statistically the most successful QB in NFL history was Dan Marino. He was a statue. Look back at some of his seasons and he was rarely sacked. I think one season he suffered 4 sacks. Some QBs get that in 1 game. Poor Patrick Ramsey. How was he able to avoid sacks? Quite simple, he had an internal clock that told him he had X amount of time to release the ball to avoid the sack. On top of this he was very accurate and had a strong arm. When you put those things together you get great stats, few sacks, and a legendary QB.

Accuracy and timing are the keys. Accuracy cannot be under rated. That is why Troy Aikman gets the praise that he does. If you are looking for a picture perfect pass to teach he very well might be the example. Other QBs had better skills but not better accuracy. When he was on, quite simply that made the whole offense hard to deal with. You add to this we relied on a running game to set up the pass and it worked to perfection for a long time.

People like to point out that Aikman's numbers faded as his weapons decreased. They rarely acknowledge that at the same time his weapons were decreasing so was the play quality due to poor coaching. Novacek and Harper were guys we all loved as much because of Aikman as anything else. Without him and this system what did they do? Was Novacek an All Pro TE in Arizona? No. Was Harper even decent in Tampa? No.

Give Aikman Parcells system for the final 3 years of his career as opposed to Gailey and Campo and I think the results would have been a lot better. He was good enough to get it done.

Mobility can add a dimension to the offense that makes it hard on a defense but in my opinion they have to be QBs first, runners 2nd, and only when no other option is available. For example, early in his career Steve Young ran too much. He was exciting and dynamic. Remember the run against Minnesota? But what was Walsh saying at that time? That he needed to WAIT for the play to develop. Once he became a passer first the 49ers returned to offensive prominence with him at QB.

Just recently an article appeared about the Falcons wanting Vick to run less. The reason is clear, they want him to mature as a QB. His running ability is as good as it gets. He needs to learn to trust the plays. If he does this the guy will be dangerous.

All kinds of myths about QBing exist. That you need a running game to offset the passing game. It helps. No doubt about it, but it is not vital. Marino never had a RB to speak of. Tom Brady hasn't until this year. Elway didn't until the end. Moon didn't. Dan Fouts didn't. Each of these men was successful at levels that are legendary. They played the position of QB like artists.

Another myth is the possession WR need myth. When the Rams were scoring 500 points three seasons in a row, Ricky Proehl was the possession WR in their offense. Yet Holt and Bruce along with Faulk were the primary targets. They are NOT possession WRs. They still succeeded.

The reason I am a QB elitist is really as simple as this statement. Quarterbacks who can read and react quickly, then throw accurately, and lead their teams are the ones I think that become legends.

An old cowboy once told me...a man who works with his hands is a laborer. A man who works with his hands and his head is an artisan. A man who works with his hands, his head, and his heart is an artist. I'm looking for an artist again.

One thing cannot be refuted abotu offense. The better the O-line the better your chances of success. I will never believe otherwise.

Hos, I'm going to go find one of your old posts that refutes every last thing you've stated above. :D

[Hostile]

Hos, I'm going to go find one of your old posts that refutes every last thing you've stated above. :D
Good on ya man. I hope you at least try to tell me what I meant. :D

I wonder if he ever bothers to answer my last reply to his questions?

[Doomsday101]

Carter would have been a 3rd round pick at the worst as Dennis Green told the world.
He isnt an elite QB obviously. Not now and wasnt then. He is also not a scrub now and wasnt then. I understand he bears a great deal of watching because he could go either way. Theres no reason to assume that he fails though. He does have some things working for him that he has yet to have. He will be in the same system which benefits all players and especially QBs. He will have a proven WR who catches lots of passes. He has a 1st day draft pick toting the rock as opposed to a bevy of undrafted free agents and a guy who was out of the league for over 2 years. Any Dallas fan should be supporting the guy and hoping he improves because the team performance hinges on that.

Instead they will tell you other players give us a better chance to win then lampoon the guy when Carter beats him out. When Vinny becomes the backup which is all but guaranteed IMHO, those fans who back him now will claim he is washed up if he couldnt beat out Carter. Its the same old Carter cant beat out any QB, oh wait that QB doesnt count now since Carter him beat him out circular jerk.

I can guarantee you when some player beats out Carter I will be quite supportive and quite hopeful. Now that BP is here we know the best player will play.

I will not speak for others only myself, When Carter won the job over Hutch I supported the move and if Carter beats out Vinny then I will support the move. I agree Parcells will play the guy he feels will give us the best chance. But again if Carter wins the job then I will have certain expectations from him if he fails then I will once again show my disapproval of his play next off-season. During the season I will not be coming down on Carter for every single mistake, I'll wait till the end of the season to look at the over all picture and not just the TEAM record but his indivdual play. I don't know how many times I need to tell people I do not hate Carter but I'm not happy with his play. If he turns it around and performs as should be expected then I will have no problem having Carter as our QB, if not then I will say so. Being a fan does not mean you should just accept poor play from any player be it Hambrick, Ekuban or Carter. A great example is Hambrick I pulled for him as hard as I have any player but by season end it was cyrstal clear he was not the man for the job.

[aikemirv]

I will not speak for others only myself, When Carter won the job over Hutch I supported the move and if Carter beats out Vinny then I will support the move. I agree Parcells will play the guy he feels will give us the best chance. But again if Carter wins the job then I will have certain expectations from him if he fails then I will once again show my disapproval of his play next off-season. During the season I will not be coming down on Carter for every single mistake, I'll wait till the end of the season to look at the over all picture and not just the TEAM record but his indivdual play. I don't know how many times I need to tell people I do not hate Carter but I'm not happy with his play. If he turns it around and performs as should be expected then I will have no problem having Carter as our QB, if not then I will say so. Being a fan does not mean you should just accept poor play from any player be it Hambrick, Ekuban or Carter. A great example is Hambrick I pulled for him as hard as I have any player but by season end it was cyrstal clear he was not the man for the job.

Those are my feelings also, all except for Hambrick. Can't stand the big mouth!

[Doomsday101]

Those are my feelings also, all except for Hambrick. Can't stand the big mouth!

I did not like his mouth either but once they hit the field they are members of the team and I will not boo them even the big mouths. The most I will normally say during the season is what I feel guys have to do to win the upcoming game. At the end of the year I will then look at the over all picture of each player and voice my opinion.

[Juke99]

Juke,

How dare you come into this forum and try to post things that make sense!

Especially when it concerns Nors.

What are you thinking man?


I thought I had it beat too....every now and then, I slip and fall back into my addiction to LOGIC!!!!!!!!!

I admit that I am powerless over logic and that my life has become unmanageable....

[junk]

You also stroke each other on forums apparently.
Supposedly you are a moderator here. If that is the case, you should know comments like this are totally unnecessary. I believe in another thread you labeled all critics of Carter as tobacco chewing rednecks. As a moderator, you SHOULD know that these type of comments are totally unneeded.

More from that article since it is now an authority.

------------------------------

It's almost unfair to expect more from Quincy Carter. He already is the shining symbol of Parcells' reclamation project in Dallas, rebounding from the scrap heap of last season to the starting quarterback of a contending team. He has done it when it seemed his short career might be over, the way he deteriorated a year ago, being benched after the seventh game, when he had four interceptions against the Cardinals, arguing with Jones on the sideline, his personal life marred by immature behavior. He stopped talking both to teammates and his offensive coordinator and blamed everyone but himself for his decline.

But Carter considers the hiring of Parcells a blessing that saved him. "I didn't grow up with a father," he says. "Having a father figure like him around is really special to me. His biggest motto is, 'Who are you? What makes you tick?' He cares about me as a person. He has gotten to know who I am, my desires, my ambitions. I want to show him I appreciate him giving me another opportunity."

So Carter the slacker has become Carter the workaholic. He has doubled the time he spends preparing for games. Now when he drops back, he's no longer in a self described fog. "I was thinking while dropping back last year, but now I'm going through my reads instead," he says. He has repaired his relationship with his teammates, and first-year offensive assistant David Lee has refined his mechanics, particularly shortening his stride to help him throw more with his legs, not just his arm.

------------------

This was just before the paragraph you use as porn.
Carter obviously looked one way then threw to the other side of the field at times. You can use the video offered here for upload by the creator of the Boom video to see that. In my post I noted Dallas tried to overload one side of the field so that Carter would have more reads in one line of vision. They did and it is a standard tactic that is found in many playbooks.

Again this is the issue with Carter haters. Their self value has been so depleted by Carter proving them wrong all last year that they hang on any negative they can find and twist it into the worst possible connotation.

BP says he wants a bus driver turns into QC sucks and all system QBs are horrid.
An offense designed around QC turns into he is unable to think or play.

Its nonsense. Typical extremism and off the charts hatred for a guy who has been a truly great story for the past year or so since BP was hired.

No where in my posts did I ever say Carter sucks. I simply stated that he will need to be able to absorb more to succeed. The 1/2 - 1/3 field comment is not based towards bashing Carter. It is common among almost all young QBs. Simply an observation. I am sure Leftwich, Palmer, Boller, etc. all have some form of this.

I also posted the link to that article because it does say good things about QC. The first half of the year, he played well. (sounds familiar, where did I say that before? Oh thats right, in this thread). However, he faltered as the season progressed. No where did I say he couldn't master more, just that he hasn't. Just coming up to speed in the NFL at QB is a monstrous chore. I would imagine any coach would want to have 15 plays in the playbook in which all 15 could be run well on a regular basis than 100 where only 2-3 could be run well due to the overload that young QBs endure.

My comment and whole point of this thread is that he will have to take on more and be able to do more to be successful. I was going for a thread that looked from a different perspective. Not at his skill set, but rather at his mastery of the offense. The whole thing was sparked in my mind by the system QB comments.

Sorry, if this offends you, but critiquing a player is OK. It happens alot. Apparently it is OK if that player is Hambrick, but not Carter.

[Nors]

Doom you're being sucked into an argument that is just barely credible to begin with.

Trying to compare one player to another is not difficult, but when you're trying to "shoe-horn" in the argument that the situations around each is identical and that the overall productivity of one will somehow miraculously dictate the future productivity of another... especially in such a team game as football, then the argument becomes almost ridiculous.

- Looking at trends in Stats is telling. I'm not going to touch the Mcnabb post you replied to.



*Young QB's throw more interceptions and tend to get sacked more.

*Statistically Quincy's 37 sacks are not great but are average compared to most all QB's at current state of development.

*Statisticall as QB's gain game experience their sacks taken are reduced

*You can't shoehorn that but the trends are their to interpret if you so desire.



I have a 25 sack ceiling on our starting QB this year. Not suprisingly we added RB, RG, RT day 1 in draft to better protect and run the ball.

[BrAinPaiNt]

Very Nice read on the QBs Hostile.

However I got a bone to pick with you...when you say Fouts didn't have a great running game.

Look at this face and tell me this did not ooze great running back....

http://www.sportsattic.com/nflphoto/photos7/Muncie,Chuck2.jpg

NEVER downplay the great Chuck Muncie (was with saints in that pic)...and his powerful BCG's (birth control glasses) :p

Ok on a serious note...Fouts did have...The Orignial Kellen Winslow, C.Jointer and Wes Chandler.

Oh and you know me...I loved to watch that Air Coryell offense and watching Fouts was a thing of Beauty. :D

[Nors]

Very Nice read on the QBs Hostile.

However I got a bone to pick with you...when you say Fouts didn't have a great running game.

Look at this face and tell me this did not ooze great running back....

http://www.sportsattic.com/nflphoto/photos7/Muncie,Chuck2.jpg

NEVER downplay the great Chuck Muncie (was with saints in that pic)...and his powerful BCG's (birth control glasses) :p

Ok on a serious note...Fouts did have...The Orignial Kellen Winslow, C.Jointer and Wes Chandler.

Oh and you know me...I loved to watch that Air Coryell offense and watching Fouts was a thing of Beauty. :D

I believe Martz installed that same offense in St Louis and look what that did!

[BrAinPaiNt]

I believe Martz installed that same offense in St Louis and look what that did!


Funny thing about that is....Martz doesn't have a TE the caliber of the Winslow Sr but he does have Faulk who is far and a way a better runner and reciever then poor old Muncie could ever dream to be.

The WRs are similar in talent in different eras IMO.

But even though Warner may have had some great years and a ring...give me Dan Fouts every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

I am a cowboy fan for life...but man I did love watching the chargers and that offense back in the day...and Fouts is one of my fave QBs of all time.

[Nors]

Ultimate playmaker

By JIM CORBETT
THE JOURNAL NEWS
(Original publication: Feb. 02, 2002)

NEW ORLEANS — Mike Martz this week has been a mild-mannered contrast to Brian Billick's arrogant act during last year's Super Bowl hype week.

The Rams' head coach's subtle arrogance comes out on game day.

That is when this 50-year-old Don Coryell disciple becomes Don Corleone in a headset.

That is when the second-year Rams head coach will kick a team when it is down; Jets center Kevin Mawae and others criticized Martz for doing just that with an onside kick when the Rams led the Jets 31-7 late in the third quarter of a 34-14 Oct. 21 rout.

Martz is the arrogance of these Rams, the innovative offensive mind who schemes up new and creative ways to pound teams flat with all that breathtaking speed.

"If I had this much talent, I'd be arrogant myself,'' said Rams safety Kim Herring, who earned a Super Bowl ring with Billick's Ravens.

With his gray-white hair and glasses, Martz looks like actor Barry Bostwick, who plays the mayor of New York in the television series "Spin City.'' But Martz hits like Barry Bonds come game time.

"He doesn't feel any pressure to pacify anyone,'' Rams running back Marshall Faulk said. "Mike is a feisty kind of guy. ... He expects nothing but the best."

Martz has created and perfected the best offense of its time. Maybe of all time.

No team before these 14-point favorites in tomorrow's Super Bowl XXXVI against the New England Patriots had ever scored more than 500 points in three consecutive seasons as the Rams have.

Martz was offensive coordinator for the Dick Vermeil-coached Rams who won Super Bowl XXXIV against Tennessee, and then succeeded Vermeil when he abruptly retired after winning the championship.

Martz's variation of the wide-open "Air'' Coryell offense he used to watch in San Diego during the 1980s has averaged an astounding 420.4 yards and 32.6 points per game the last three seasons.
Patriots coach Bill Belichick, the defensive mastermind whose chess game against Martz is pivotal to New England's chances, said only the Dan Fouts-Kellen Winslow Chargers had as much offensive speed as these Rams.

"The only team I would compare would be the '80 Chargers with Fouts, (Chuck) Muncie, Winslow at tight end and the receivers ... (John) Jefferson, (Charlie) Joiner,'' Belichick said. "That's the only team that I think has the same type of speed and skill that I've played against that you can really compare with the Rams.

"Mike's done a tremendous job of utilizing the players he has. He's got a system that has enough flexibility to allow him to do it. They're very tough to defend. There's no way you can say, 'We're going to stop this or we're going to stop that.' There's too many things to defend."

Belichick will likely have to scheme his defensive masterpiece for the Patriots to have a chance against one of the most imaginative — and intense — offensive minds.

"Mike is a competitor,'' said Pittsburgh Steelers running back Jerome Bettis, a Ram from 1993-95. "He does whatever it takes to win. You have to admire that. Most coaches won't do that because of that fear of their reputation. He believes, 'If I can do this to help my football team, I'll do it regardless of what I'm called or how I'm looked at.' "

Because image is everything in the NFL, Martz worries about his perception as a run-it-up coach.

But he doesn't worry enough to change his approach.

"I do worry about insulting people,'' Martz said this week. "I don't like that and it's certainly not our intent. But we take an aggressive approach to things, and I guess that is interpreted as being somewhat arrogant. I understand that. But its not our intent to be disrespectful to anybody.''

[MichaelWinicki]

Good on ya man. I hope you at least try to tell me what I meant. :D

I wonder if he ever bothers to answer my last reply to his questions?


Well you know I think you're about the last person we should trust when it comes to knowing what you meant. ;)

As a matter of fact, I think we should get Norsey to start telling us what you mean when you post something.

[MichaelWinicki]

I thought I had it beat too....every now and then, I slip and fall back into my addiction to LOGIC!!!!!!!!!

I admit that I am powerless over logic and that my life has become unmanageable....


Well you do know the first step is acceptance. :)

[MichaelWinicki]

- Looking at trends in Stats is telling. I'm not going to touch the Mcnabb post you replied to.



*Young QB's throw more interceptions and tend to get sacked more.

*Statistically Quincy's 37 sacks are not great but are average compared to most all QB's at current state of development.

*Statisticall as QB's gain game experience their sacks taken are reduced

*You can't shoehorn that but the trends are their to interpret if you so desire.



I have a 25 sack ceiling on our starting QB this year. Not suprisingly we added RB, RG, RT day 1 in draft to better protect and run the ball.


Nors, I'm going to clue you on a revelation. No matter what else happens, Quincy Carter is not Donovan McNabb. And as much as I dislike McNabb he has more overall talent than Quincy.

[Nors]

Nors, I'm going to clue you on a revelation. No matter what else happens, Quincy Carter is not Donovan McNabb. And as much as I dislike McNabb he has more overall talent than Quincy.

I NEVER made any comparison of the two whatsoever.
I never stated ANYWHERE in this thread or board history that QC was more talented than McNabb.

All I posted were a handfull of various QB's career sack histories. Stop with the clue digs when you are incorrect on the facts.

Good afternoon Mikey. :p

[MichaelWinicki]

I NEVER made any comparison of the two whatsoever.
I never stated ANYWHERE in this thread or board history that QC was more talented than McNabb.

All I posted were a handfull of various QB's career sack histories. Stop with the clue digs when you are incorrect on the facts.

Good afternoon Mikey. :p


Afternoon Nors!

I know you didn't say Q was more talented than McNabb.

But from all appearances it seems that McNabb's upside is far greater than that of Quincy's. And taking that into consideration it could very well be that Quincy, no matter the offensive line or what offensive talent is around him will never reach the productivity level of McNabb.

And that's why Henson was brought in and it is also why that if Q doesn't show big-time improvement this year especially when it comes to TDs and Ints then it will be the Henson show next year.

[blindzebra]

Perhaps the Jets max protected and Dallas didnt. At least that WAS the case when they played each other.

Yeah and we sent 5 receivers on every play, right?

Vinny got sacked less, had a higher comp. %, a higher yards per, and a 3 to 1 TD/INT ratio. I don't give a rat's patootie if they only sent ONE receiver out, because it was OBVIOUS that he found him.

[Nors]

Afternoon Nors!

I know you didn't say Q was more talented than McNabb.

But from all appearances it seems that McNabb's upside is far greater than that of Quincy's. And taking that into consideration it could very well be that Quincy, no matter the offensive line or what offensive talent is around him will never reach the productivity level of McNabb.

And that's why Henson was brought in and it is also why that if Q doesn't show big-time improvement this year especially when it comes to TDs and Ints then it will be the Henson show next year.

Could happen, also could happen that McNABB Is far more talented but Quincy wins a Super Bowl first. There is a theory Henson never unseats Carter here if he steps up for Parcells.

[Doomsday101]

Could happen, also could happen that McNABB Is far more talented but Quincy wins a Super Bowl first. There is a theory Henson never unseats Carter here if he steps up for Parcells.

Quincy is going to win the super bowl? what about the other 21 starters on the team? I guess they will just watch as Carter win the SB? You need to start watching Golf or Tennis where the individual actally wins or loses

[blindzebra]

You also stroke each other on forums apparently.

For a mod, you sure like to accuse and insult other posters.

You repeatedly make these overblown generalzations and childish comments about the so- called haters, but fail to see that 83% of these threads are started by YOUR SIDE OF THE DEBATE!

You don't like "haters" then stop the mindless crap that is over flowing from the two most prolific posters on this subject. Both of which are Carter OVER-supports.

[Nors]

Quincy is going to win the super bowl? what about the other 21 starters on the team? I guess they will just watch as Carter win the SB? You need to start watching Golf or Tennis where the individual actally wins or loses


I disagree on the other 21 guys.

Its 53 players and those on Practice squad as well.

[Doomsday101]

I disagree on the other 21 guys.

Its 53 players and those on Practice squad as well.

Point taken. So the 52 other guys will watch as Carter wins the Super Bowl, Feel better now? After all your saying how Carter is going to go out and win the Super Bowl. Hell Carter has yet to do much within his own play while we do have many others on this team who have actually gone out and performed like pro players.

[ChrisFul]

For a mod, you sure like to accuse and insult other posters.

You repeatedly make these overblown generalzations and childish comments about the so- called haters, but fail to see that 83% of these threads are started by YOUR SIDE OF THE DEBATE!

You don't like "haters" then stop the mindless crap that is over flowing from the two most prolific posters on this subject. Both of which are Carter OVER-supports.

The vast majority of the insults and general bad behavior comes from the "hater" side. There's 3 years of posts over on the other board if you want to crunch some numbers.

[Nors]

Point taken. So the 52 other guys will watch as Carter wins the Super Bowl, Feel better now? After all your saying how Carter is going to go out and win the Super Bowl. Hell Carter has yet to do much within his own play while we do have many others on this team who have actually gone out and performed like pro players.

And Carter is the starter. He will be a major contributor to achieving that? Is that fair? All the "average" Career QB's who won a Super Bowl - played lights out or error free ball in playoffs and Super Bowl history.

[ChrisFul]

We were 10-6 with Hambrick running the ball I guess we should have kept him. Vinny threw 7 TD 2 Int and over 60% completion and you want to blame him for the 2-5 start the Jets had? Jets had some problems Vinny was not the problem

Please. The Hambrick 10-6 thing is getting terribly old.

The offense runs through the QB. He touches the ball on every single play and is the most important position on offense. He runs the show. To say that a mediocre running back impacts the offense just as much is insane.

[blindzebra]

The vast majority of the insults and general bad behavior comes from the "hater" side. There's 3 years of posts over on the other board if you want to crunch some numbers.

You have absolutely ZERO credibility.

The numbers are right there, you have a mod throwing out insults. Nors has just started another poll thread and you say that BS.

I'll NEVER start a thread about Quincy Carter, hell any of our QBs, for the next 6 months. You think that will end this?

Get Nors, CowboynIRAQ, and Qcard to do the same and you know what will happen?

[blindzebra]

Please. The Hambrick 10-6 thing is getting terribly old.

The offense runs through the QB. He touches the ball on every single play and is the most important position on offense. He runs the show. To say that a mediocre running back impacts the offense just as much is insane.

Isn't that the NUMBER one excus...fact that you use about Carter?

[Nors]

You have absolutely ZERO credibility.

The numbers are right there, you have a mod throwing out insults. Nors has just started another poll thread and you say that BS.

I'll NEVER start a thread about Quincy Carter, hell any of our QBs, for the next 6 months. You think that will end this?

Get Nors, CowboynIRAQ, and Qcard to do the same and you know what will happen?

Perfectly legitimate poll? What is your issue. In fact I voted that he will most resemble Roger Staubach in the years absence similarity and athletic abilities.

A very close second was a Chad Hutchinson vote but I did not choose so. Stop all this "sides" stuff. This is One team.

[Doomsday101]

Please. The Hambrick 10-6 thing is getting terribly old.

The offense runs through the QB. He touches the ball on every single play and is the most important position on offense. He runs the show. To say that a mediocre running back impacts the offense just as much is insane.

I agree the most improtant position on offense is the QB and when I see a QB with such poor numbers I damn well know he was not the reason we went 10-6. You believe what ever you want it makes me no differance but watching Carter play please do not tell me how he was the reason this team won 10 games. I know better.

[ChrisFul]

Ha ha!

I have zero credibility?

There's a bunch of posters who will say otherwise, and all of them have been around longer than you.

[blindzebra]

Perfectly legitimate poll? What is your issue. In fact I voted that he will most resemble Roger Staubach in the years absence similarity and athletic abilities.

A very close second was a Chad Hutchinson vote but I did not choose so. Stop all this "sides" stuff. This is One team.

You have posted another poll for the sole purpose of keeping this going.

[TheSkaven]

This seemed to have a fair deal of success early in the season. However, I think defenses eventually caught up with this simple offense and learned to defend it. The individual players abilities (Hambrick, Carter, OL, WRs) were not good enough to consistently overcome this. As a result, the offense tailed off as the season wore on.

I heard Troy Aikman about a month ago comment on this. He said that during the first five weeks of the season, teams were giving Hambrick respect. They brought an extra man up in the box, figuring they could completely shut down the run and force Quincy to beat them. He did.

Then, as the season wore on, teams got wise and started playing the Cowboys with basic 7 man fronts. Hambrick still couldn't get past his 3.5 yards per carry average and it crippled the team. Let's hope Jones can strike some fear into defenses this coming year.

My second observation is that I think Bill Parcells got more conservative as the year wore on. In the beginning, this wasn't a playoff team in anyone's mind, he let it all hang out and called a fairly aggressive game. After the 5-1 start, I think Bill started to overthink himself and played not to lose, relying on the defense.

[blindzebra]

Ha ha!

I have zero credibility?

There's a bunch of posters who will say otherwise, and all of them have been around longer than you.

What have you done for us lately?

Funny, how you did not address the meat of my post. The part that DEALT with these credibility issues.

Nope, old Chrisful chose to pine for the good old days, when you had to be in the clique to be taken seriously. Sorry if you feel like you are no longer sitting at the "cool" table.

[Nors]

What have you done for us lately?

Funny, how you did not address the meat of my post. The part that DEALT with these credibility issues.

Nope, old Chrisful chose to pine for the good old days, when you had to be in the clique to be taken seriously. Sorry if you feel like you are no longer sitting at the "cool" table.


message - nm - min

[MichaelWinicki]

What have you done for us lately?

Funny, how you did not address the meat of my post. The part that DEALT with these credibility issues.

Nope, old Chrisful chose to pine for the good old days, when you had to be in the clique to be taken seriously. Sorry if you feel like you are no longer sitting at the "cool" table.

Hey did I hear right? There's an empty spot at the "cool" table?

[blindzebra]

Hey did I hear right? There's an empty spot at the "cool" table?

There are many, it seems. Of course you'll be sitting alone with Chrisful. ;)

[MichaelWinicki]

There are many, it seems. Of course you'll be sitting alone with Chrisful. ;)


I'm afraid I'm on opposite sides with Chris on this issue. Even though I do find his posts to be good reads.

I never made the "cool" table on the old site. Booze seemed to dictate who was cool and who wasn't. My "Good Mornings" with Sarge made me "uncool". :(

[blindzebra]

I'm afraid I'm on opposite sides with Chris on this issue. Even though I do find his posts to be good reads.

I never made the "cool" table on the old site. Booze seemed to dictate who was cool and who wasn't. My "Good Mornings" with Sarge made me "uncool". :(

That's the reason I started posting late on the old forum and here on the new one. CBZ40 PMed me.

My first post on the old forum was actually directed at a post bemoaning the new people ruining the forum. Ironic, ain't it.

The old board was too elitist. I can almost see Booze and SBK with paddles, while a new member is saying, "Thank you sir, may I have another!"

[Kangaroo]

Is the day I need to hange it up :)

Becuase geeks and dorks just do not belong at the cool table and I fitt both scenarios :D

[ChrisFul]

There are many, it seems. Of course you'll be sitting alone with Chrisful. ;)

Give me a break.

[MichaelWinicki]

Is the day I need to hange it up :)

Becuase geeks and dorks just do not belong at the cool table and I fitt both scenarios :D


LOL! But K are you a dork in a geeks body or a geek in a dorks body?