Anthony Becht disses Gosselin's evaluation of Escobar pick

[jterrell]

Beasley was having zero trouble getting open last week. That was a Weeden fail, not a coaching fail.

If he was open repeatedly and the coaches do not point that out to Weeden that is a fail.

Ultimately it is on the Coaches to know the game plan and what works and enforce that upon the QB.

What I know for sure is the last two games we have went Beasley in the slot over Escobar and lost.
The two games prior to that we went Escobar in slot and won including versus SEA which has a great coverage unit.

Beasley gives us nothing in blocking, nothing in special teams and basically nothing overall yet he is a folk hero to the yokels.
He has topped 25 yards receiving once the entire year.
Hard to blame that all on Weeden.

In games Escobar doesn't play we are 1-3(the win was in OT) with an average point total of about 18.
In games he has at least two targets we average OVER 30 PPG and are 5-0.

 

[jterrell]

I actually agree with you that Escobar was the better choice in this case. I can't get behind a guy being a 'stupid' choice if that guy's open in critical situations and the QB just doesn't get him the ball. The receivers can't do any more than run their routes, be open, and catch it if it comes to them. The coaches can't do any more than call plays that get receivers open. If the QB can't or won't make the throws, then the only thing stupid is the QB's decision making.

Beasley has been targeted 20 times this year; caught 15. He has never gotten open behind anyone just underneath.
He is averaging 8.8 yards per catch. 0 TDS.

Escobar has been targeted 9 times, catching 7 for 12 yards per catch and 3 TDs.

Factor in we are running team that can use the blocking....

That is the definition of stupid coaching and lack of understanding analytics to adjust the offense.

 

[perrykemp]

Well I do agree as of right now it is a wasted pick. That pick was a luxury we didn't need. Tight end could've been addressed 2 or 3 years from now. That being said, I have no doubt in my mind he can play. He contributes when he's out there. But yea its technically a wasted pick that should've went towards the defense.

Kinda like Marty Bennett. He's on pace for 96 catches for 1014 yards and 10 TDs which is on par for Witten's best season ever.

Not that I think he is anywhere the player Witten has been, however, Marty is one of the few guys I rue over because it obvious this potential was there.

 

[Crown Royal]

If he was open repeatedly and the coaches do not point that out to Weeden that is a fail.

Ultimately it is on the Coaches to know the game plan and what works and enforce that upon the QB.

What I know for sure is the last two games we have went Beasley in the slot over Escobar and lost.
The two games prior to that we went Escobar in slot and won including versus SEA which has a great coverage unit.

Beasley gives us nothing in blocking, nothing in special teams and basically nothing overall yet he is a folk hero to the yokels.
He has topped 25 yards receiving once the entire year.
Hard to blame that all on Weeden.

In games Escobar doesn't play we are 1-3(the win was in OT) with an average point total of about 18.
In games he has at least two targets we average OVER 30 PPG and are 5-0.

Sorry but this statement is like saying that in the two games we lost, we scored less points than the opponent. Two great games by Escobar is not enough to discover correlation. Beasley was open, and considering the play call using a rub route, I find it very difficult to believe that the coaches hadn't told Weeden to look for this route - they called it two times to spring Beasley open, and Weeden locked onto Bryant and Witten like he had all day. Since they called the same play on two successive drives, there is just no way that Weeden wasn't coached into the proper progression.

Every bit of evidence points to a failure by Weeden, but you're calling out the coaching staff. My friend, when you hear hooves, think horses, not zebras.

Back to the point of the thread - Escobar is a fine player. Gosselin is an old school opinion-hack.

 

[Crown Royal]

Beasley has been targeted 20 times this year; caught 15. He has never gotten open behind anyone just underneath.
He is averaging 8.8 yards per catch. 0 TDS.

Escobar has been targeted 9 times, catching 7 for 12 yards per catch and 3 TDs.

Factor in we are running team that can use the blocking....

That is the definition of stupid coaching and lack of understanding analytics to adjust the offense.

Your analytics need to include situational football. Escobar has been targeted in the redzone, beasley on third downs.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

Kinda like Marty Bennett. He's on pace for 96 catches for 1014 yards and 10 TDs which is on par for Witten's best season ever.

Not that I think he is anywhere the player Witten has been, however, Marty is one of the few guys I rue over because it obvious this potential was there.

Well my thing with Martelllus is that I believe he's the player that needs to play a lot of snaps to be productive. I also think Escobar has more potential than him in the passing game BUT Martellus was a GREAT blocker here. Even better than Witten. I won't say I rue over him but he also was another wasted pick. Even more so than Escobar because he was never going to get time here.

Cowboys could've kept Martellus but they didn't want to overpay for what he contributed to the team. And that was always going to be the case. His future was never in Dallas because of Witten. Which is where the wasted pick comes into play.

 

[speedkilz88]

Beasley has been targeted 20 times this year; caught 15. He has never gotten open behind anyone just underneath.
He is averaging 8.8 yards per catch. 0 TDS.

Escobar has been targeted 9 times, catching 7 for 12 yards per catch and 3 TDs.

Factor in we are running team that can use the blocking....

That is the definition of stupid coaching and lack of understanding analytics to adjust the offense.

How many were first downs for Beasley?

 

[cowboys2233]

I thought he would have been a good option for Weeden. I know Beasley was getting open a lot, but Escobar is a big target and has a wide catch radius. I think he could have pulled in some of those inaccurate throws that Weeden was making.

Plastic Man couldn't have pulled in some of those passes. Frankly, I take a lot of positives from that game. We were still reasonably competitive despite the fact that we had a total hack for a quarterback out there. He was that bad. How is it that a guy can make it all the way to the NFL without being able to throw a reasonably accurate ten-yard pass? These are not hard throws he was missing, they were automatic throws and he didn't come close.

Okay, I'm done ranting against Weeden for a few minutes. LOL.

 

[jterrell]

Sorry but this statement is like saying that in the two games we lost, we scored less points than the opponent. Two great games by Escobar is not enough to discover correlation. Beasley was open, and considering the play call using a rub route, I find it very difficult to believe that the coaches hadn't told Weeden to look for this route - they called it two times to spring Beasley open, and Weeden locked onto Bryant and Witten like he had all day. Since they called the same play on two successive drives, there is just no way that Weeden wasn't coached into the proper progression.

Every bit of evidence points to a failure by Weeden, but you're calling out the coaching staff. My friend, when you hear hooves, think horses, not zebras.

Back to the point of the thread - Escobar is a fine player. Gosselin is an old school opinion-hack.

Just so you know int he top video , if Weeden makes that pass to Beasley it is not a first down.
That's the way the NFL works, guys close fast.

Second video, same problem.

They are running Beasley underneath on very shallow routes and he is too small to break any tackles.

Weeden is trying to pick up first downs because it is 3rd down in BOTH situations.

This is called 'fans are dumber than they think'.

 

[cowboys2233]

Beasley was having zero trouble getting open last week. That was a Weeden fail, not a coaching fail.

It was ALL Weeden fail. It was not poor play calling or game planning, it was not a matter of not running Murray enough. Weeden could not even throw a competent forward pass -- it made everything else (game planning, etc.) look so much worse than it really was. How can you possibly put a coherent game plan together if your QB can't throw the ball? If a healthy Romo were playing in that game, we win by 20. Doesn't matter much to me because we may get a chance to face them again. I truly hope that team and their fans are not as overly confident as they're acting, because they're setting themselves up for a horrible surprise if that's the case.

 

[jterrell]

Your analytics need to include situational football. Escobar has been targeted in the redzone, beasley on third downs.

Beasley has been targeted 20 times and caught 15 passes for 12 first downs.
Escobar has been targeted 9 times and caught 7 passes with 5 first downs.

They play the same position situationally which is why they don't play together.

Your grasp of this "situation" is just not very good.

I can almost guarantee they will mention they made an adjustment to use Escobar more, be it this week or after the BYE.
Because it is common sense football.

 

[cowboys2233]

Just so you know int he top video , if Weeden makes that pass to Beasley it is not a first down.
That's the way the NFL works, guys close fast.

Second video, same problem.

They are running Beasley underneath on very shallow routes and he is too small to break any tackles.

Weeden is trying to pick up first downs because it is 3rd down in BOTH situations.

This is called 'fans are dumber than they think'.

If you can honestly look at that video and come to the conclusion that Beasley wouldn't have made the first down, you are completely, totally and profoundly blind. That's it.

 

[Crown Royal]

Just so you know int he top video , if Weeden makes that pass to Beasley it is not a first down.
That's the way the NFL works, guys close fast.

Second video, same problem.

They are running Beasley underneath on very shallow routes and he is too small to break any tackles.

Weeden is trying to pick up first downs because it is 3rd down in BOTH situations.

This is called 'fans are dumber than they think'.

That just isn't true at all. The closest defender in video one is 7 yards or so away. the second one is no guarantee, but considering that the only catch he DID have for the day he juked the defender out of his jock and gained a first down, I would suggest he has shown that he is capable.

I'm not a yokel that believe Beasley is anything more than a minor role player, nor would I believe that the Cowboys shouldn't use Escobar more. But the idea that not using him had anything to do with our performance, or that if Escobar had been in would have changed anything is absurd, considering that weeden was not throwing to anyone other than Bryant or Witten anyway.

 

[Idgit]

Beasley has been targeted 20 times this year; caught 15. He has never gotten open behind anyone just underneath.
He is averaging 8.8 yards per catch. 0 TDS.

Escobar has been targeted 9 times, catching 7 for 12 yards per catch and 3 TDs.

Factor in we are running team that can use the blocking....

That is the definition of stupid coaching and lack of understanding analytics to adjust the offense.

Not sure being open underneath qualifies as a liability in that game. And its not like the blocking was a limitation on the plays Beaseley was open for. There's no knowing that Escobar would have been open behind the coverage against AZ just because he had 3 touchdowns in a different game.

Sorry, we don't have to agree, but when the play that was called gets an underneath receiver wide open for a 3rd down conversion and the QB doesn't see it, that's not a very workable definition of stupid coaching in my book. And if it were, smarter coaching would be pretty low on my list of priorities for winning more football games.
Until the plays that are called don't work when the QB throws the ball to one of the open guys, I'm going to keep putting the fault on the QB where I think it belongs.

 

[Crown Royal]

By the way since we're talking about Escobar. One of the plays he was in, Weeden is flushed out of the pocket but then has time to throw. Escobar has DESTROYED coverage and is downfield for an easy td. Weeden doesn't see him and just runs.

Let's face it, that guys was focusing on NOBODY not named Bryant or Witten. Call it coaching if you want, but I really doubt that neither Linehand or Romo himself said "hey - maybe you should go through some progressions" one the sideline.

 

[TrailBlazer]

Second round picks should have more of an impact than Escobar has had. Doesn't mean he isn't a good player though.

 

[Crown Royal]

Not sure being open underneath qualifies as a liability in that game. And its not like the blocking was a limitation on the plays Beaseley was open for. There's no knowing that Escobar would have been open behind the coverage against AZ just because he had 3 touchdowns in a different game.

Sorry, we don't have to agree, but when the play that was called gets an underneath receiver wide open for a 3rd down conversion and the QB doesn't see it, that's not a very workable definition of stupid coaching in my book. And if it were, smarter coaching would be pretty low on my list of priorities for winning more football games.
Until the plays that are called don't work when the QB throws the ball to one of the open guys, I'm going to keep putting the fault on the QB where I think it belongs.

Beasley has one job - get 1st down conversions within the 20s. he does that 80% of the time,which is a higher precentage than Escobar. that isn't to say Escobar couldn't do the same - but in the game I just watched, it was clear it didn't matter who was in the slot. They weren't getting targeted.

 

[jterrell]

That just isn't true at all. The closest defender in video one is 7 yards or so away. the second one is no guarantee, but considering that the only catch he DID have for the day he juked the defender out of his jock and gained a first down, I would suggest he has shown that he is capable.

I'm not a yokel that believe Beasley is anything more than a minor role player, nor would I believe that the Cowboys shouldn't use Escobar more. But the idea that not using him had anything to do with our performance, or that if Escobar had been in would have changed anything is absurd, considering that weeden was not throwing to anyone other than Bryant or Witten anyway.

Try watching a few COMPLETIONS and see how far the nearest defender upon start of the pass is and how far the WR gets after the catch.
NFL players cover 40 yards in 5 seconds... you think they can't cover 7 in 2?

You think if Weeden targets and throws to Beasley the nearest defender is going to stand still guarding Dez? ROFL.

Beasley was never within 4 yards of a 1st down and if Weeden makes that play he is running parallel to catch the ball while 3 defenders charge up to tackle him short.

The better and proper choice would have been a check down to Murray who has actually broken a ton of tackles on that play and was moving north-south and then kicking the field goal if he didn't get it.
Beasley would have been a good option if he could hold the ball for another two seconds to get him released near the sideline.
That's the play design.

 

[jterrell]

Beasley has one job - get 1st down conversions within the 20s. he does that 80% of the time,which is a higher precentage than Escobar. that isn't to say Escobar couldn't do the same - but in the game I just watched, it was clear it didn't matter who was in the slot. They weren't getting targeted.

math bad much?

Beasley gets a first down on 12 out of 20 attempts which is 60% not 80%.

Arguments can change but math is math.

 

[Crown Royal]

Try watching a few COMPLETIONS and see how far the nearest defender upon start of the pass is and how far the WR gets after the catch.
NFL players cover 40 yards in 5 seconds... you think they can't cover 7 in 2?

You think if Weeden targets and throws to Beasley the nearest defender is going to stand still guarding Dez? ROFL.

Beasley was never within 4 yards of a 1st down and if Weeden makes that play he is running parallel to catch the ball while 3 defenders charge up to tackle him short.

The better and proper choice would have been a check down to Murray who has actually broken a ton of tackles on that play and was moving north-south and then kicking the field goal if he didn't get it.
Beasley would have been a good option if he could hold the ball for another two seconds to get him released near the sideline.
That's the play design.

Your analytics told me earlier that Beasley converts on 80% of his catches. He was even more covered earlier in the game than he was in the first gif, and still converted. So yes, I'm going to say that the statitics support a throw to beasley.

Honestly, I'd be fine with it going to Murray as well. Even though he was even farther from the LOS and defenders would have more time to get to him.

But what I wouldn't do is go to a triple covered WR.