Anthony Becht disses Gosselin's evaluation of Escobar pick

[Crown Royal]

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.

I based it on completions, not attempts.
But if you want to go with attempts, that's fine by me. 60% is still better than 55% I believe.

 

[Idgit]

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 jterrell, but I think you've got a good case of a tail wagging a dog here.

And people like Beasley because he's a great weapon in the slot. There's nothing wrong with a guy who catches almost everything you throw to him and is able to get open underneath the coverage. When that guy started drawing double teams on third downs like he did late last season, you know you're onto something. He's not a folk hero, though, just because people expect the QB to throw the ball to him when he's open instead of throwing into coverage. And people aren't yokels for thinking you ought to distribute the ball to the open receiver.

And I like Escobar more than most, I think. Nobody's saying he's not a legitimate weapon or that the coaches couldn't also have made use of him. This is what happens when you have a lot of weapons on an offense. It doesn't mean anybody's an idiot when the number of offensive positions and the number of offensive snaps per game, and the number of footballs per passing play are all limited.

Stupid is doing stuff that doesn't work. You can make an argument that stupid might be trying new stuff when the stuff you're doing is working. I'm not buying your argument that it's stupid to not do something that might work better if it means taking an open receiver out of the lineup. Nor do I think it's a given that it would matter if the QB isn't likely to throw the ball to Escobar anyway.

 

[jterrell]

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.

Sticking to the very basic points.

Beasley being open for non 1st downs is pointless.
Escobar averages 12 yards per catch yet has that average punished by short TD catches.
He falls forward and it's 3 yards because the dude is huge. It takes time and effort to get him on the ground and he can catch the ball well away from his body.

This is merely common sense.

You have one guy who is really big and has great hands and can block some or another guy who is really quick and has good hands but is small and can't block.
In this system anyone with a brain realizes you play the big guy.
He fits the play action running game FAR better. And he averages more yards per catch because he can fall forward after contact.

Poor Beasley gets knocked 5 yards after every shove much less a real hit.

Again you guys will see as the season wears on.
I am done arguing the most common sense football principles.

 

[cowboys2233]

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.

You are utterly clueless. Sorry. Who the heck was going to stop him, Peterson? The guy focused on Dez and running in the opposite direction of Beasley? What the heck are you looking at?

 

[jterrell]

Sorry jterrell, but I think you've got a good case of a tail wagging a dog here.

And people like Beasley because he's a great weapon in the slot. There's nothing wrong with a guy who catches almost everything you throw to him and is able to get open underneath the coverage. When that guy started drawing double teams on third downs like he did late last season, you know you're onto something. He's not a folk hero, though, just because people expect the QB to throw the ball to him when he's open instead of throwing into coverage. And people aren't yokels for thinking you ought to distribute the ball to the open receiver.

And I like Escobar more than most, I think. Nobody's saying he's not a legitimate weapon or that the coaches couldn't also have made use of him. This is what happens when you have a lot of weapons on an offense. It doesn't mean anybody's an idiot when the number of offensive positions and the number of offensive snaps per game, and the number of footballs per passing play are all limited.

Stupid is doing stuff that doesn't work. You can make an argument that stupid might be trying new stuff when the stuff you're doing is working. I'm not buying your argument that it's stupid to not do something that might work better if it means taking an open receiver out of the lineup. Nor do I think it's a given that it would matter if the QB isn't likely to throw the ball to Escobar anyway.

Beasley is NOT a great weapon in the slot. Look at his stats.
He is a good underneath guy who can pick up short first downs.

 

[jterrell]

You are utterly clueless. Sorry. Who the heck was going to stop him, Peterson? The guy focused on Dez and running in the opposite direction of Beasley? What the heck are you looking at?

cool story bro, all defenders are blind to the QB and don't break on the ball.
try harder man really.

 

[cowboys2233]

cool story bro, all defenders are blind to the QB and don't break on the ball.
try harder man really.

Oh, you're one of the "cool story, bro" kind of guys. I get it now. Never mind.

 

[Idgit]

Sticking to the very basic points.

Beasley being open for non 1st downs is pointless.
Escobar averages 12 yards per catch yet has that average punished by short TD catches.
He falls forward and it's 3 yards because the dude is huge. It takes time and effort to get him on the ground and he can catch the ball well away from his body.

This is merely common sense.

You have one guy who is really big and has great hands and can block some or another guy who is really quick and has good hands but is small and can't block.
In this system anyone with a brain realizes you play the big guy.
He fits the play action running game FAR better. And he averages more yards per catch because he can fall forward after contact.

Poor Beasley gets knocked 5 yards after every shove much less a real hit.

Again you guys will see as the season wears on.
I am done arguing the most common sense football principles.

Probably for the best. As I said, I like both guys for what they give us, so it's no sweat off my back. We don't have to agree on whether or not playing a slot WR who happened to be open in some critical situations but not thrown to was stupid coaching or not.

 

[Idgit]

And let's all take a deep breath and not forget this is a nice thread about Goose Gosselin being an idiot, ok? Because those should be enjoyable threads, generally.

 

[Crown Royal]

And let's all take a deep breath and not forget this is a nice thread about Goose Gosselin being an idiot, ok? Because those should be enjoyable threads, generally.

 

[dboyz]

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'.

Seriously. Beasley is very quick and makes a living out of making the first guy miss and getting first downs. There is no basis to say "it is not a first down." To be technical non one knows for sure, but I would sure take my chances with it. I would say way over 50% chance Beasley converts on both plays.

 

[cowboys2233]

And let's all take a deep breath and not forget this is a nice thread about Goose Gosselin being an idiot, ok? Because those should be enjoyable threads, generally.

Serenity now!

 

[cowboys2233]

Seriously. Beasley is very quick and makes a living out of making the first guy miss and getting first downs. There is no basis to say "it is not a first down." To be technical non one knows for sure, but I would sure take my chances with it. I would say way over 50% chance Beasley converts on both plays.

Actually, I do know for sure. There is exactly a 0.0% chance he would have been stopped short of the first down.

 

[TimHortons]

And let's all take a deep breath and not forget this is a nice thread about Goose Gosselin being an idiot, ok? Because those should be enjoyable threads, generally.

It's tough to blame cowboys2233 for getting a little worked up when jterrell says that Beas won't get the first down in that first gif he posted when it's clear as day that he would get it easily

 

[speedkilz88]

Seriously. Beasley is very quick and makes a living out of making the first guy miss and getting first downs. There is no basis to say "it is not a first down." To be technical non one knows for sure, but I would sure take my chances with it. I would say way over 50% chance Beasley converts on both plays.

He gets a lot more than the first down on the first one. It could be close with the second but I've seen him do it pretty routinely.

 

[cowboys2233]

It's tough to blame cowboys2233 for getting a little worked up when jterrell says that Beas won't get the first down in that first gif he posted when it's clear as day that he would get it easily

That, and the fact that jterrell is posturing like we simply don't know how fast NFL defenders close. You have got to be blind, drunk or stupid to say that Beasley wouldn't make that first down.

 

[Idgit]

It's tough to blame cowboys2233 for getting a little worked up when jterrell says that Beas won't get the first down in that first gif he posted when it's clear as day that he would get it easily

Yep. I'm not blaming anybody, and I think 2233 is obviously in the right here. I just want the wah restored here a little bit after some of the exchanges heated up here a little bit.

 

[Idgit]

That, and the fact that jterrell is posturing like we simply don't know how fast NFL defenders close. You have got to be blind, drunk or stupid to say that Beasley wouldn't make that first down.

You think he's not going to react to you suggesting he's blind/drunk/stupid now? Come on. Let's keep the nice thread nice here guys. I don't want to lock a topic that's got lots of juice left in it. The OP isn't about Beasley, anyway. It's about Gosselin being wrong on the internet. What an idiot, am I right?

 

[cowboys2233]

You think he's not going to react to you suggesting he's blind/drunk/stupid now? Come on. Let's keep the nice thread nice here guys. I don't want to lock a topic that's got lots of juice left in it. The OP isn't about Beasley, anyway. It's about Gosselin being wrong on the internet. What an idiot, am I right?

Okay, I'm done.

 

[CCBoy]

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.

Good posting here, and the fail was in both delivery and technique by Weeden.

But the bottom line for the hysteria laiden sky is falling statement, is a good loss, not end of world news. In a growth year, minor setbacks are not a Lombardi or smear situation type of evaluation.

To further digress, and not center on quarterback play, or even selections, then it is classless to use an underused player as one's sounding board. That in fact, stinks...yellow journalism decades behind that level of media interventions.