Matt Hasselback vs Weeden

[Chuck 54]

It's not just who the backup is....

Without a run game, and we don't have one so far in our 2 losses, and without our franchise WR, this offense stinks....a backup QB can't overcome that. Romo might do better changing plays and scrambling, but he wouldn't be lighting it up either.

Right now in two losses, it's basically the backup QB throwing to TWilliams vs. the entire secondary of the defense....everything else is dump to RB or find Witten. That's not much offense, fellas....we gambled with our WR corps because Dez was holding out for big money, and now we're paying the price for not having any other quality wideout.

Call me crazy, but if I could have only one player back right now for the next 5 weeks, it would be Dez over Romo.
I would only bring Romo back over Dez if we had the run game going or if it was the playoffs....but to run out a string of wins waiting to get everyone healthy, right now Dez is more valuable than Tony because Tony still doesn't have anyone to throw to. Without Dez, Tony would probably get injured scrambling around waiting on someone to get open....or he'd be doing exactly what Weeden is doing.

 

[Sasquatch]

Call me crazy, but if I could have only one player back right now for the next 5 weeks, it would be Dez over Romo.

Weeden would have a had a couple of TDs that he could not complete to T Will in the end zone if it had been Dez on the receiving end. Not sure why they're sending TWill on those routes since they are not his forte.

 

[KJJ]

Good stuff! Kyle Orton was pretty good too. He was a strong backup. I think if we still had him we would be 4-0 currently. Orton has all the tools necessary

Orton was good but he only had to start one game for the Cowboys and they lost. I don't believe the Cowboys would be 4-0 with Orton they barely got past the Giants on opening day with Romo and it took a huge clock management mistake to give the Cowboys a chance. The offense hasn't been great but the defense has really killed us the last 2 games. Even with Romo the Cowboys would have had a tough time winning the last 2 games with the running game being what it is which is not very good and the defense being piss poor.

 

[Idgit]

Before the season, if you took a poll asking if people would be satisfied with a 24 points per game average with Weeden at the helm, I'm guessing you would have had a fairly high percentage of responses in the affirmative. That doesn't necessarily mean I think Weeden is awesome or is the best option at backup QB, only that my expectation, proven completely false, would have been that the team should be able to pull out a victory with that kind of offensive production.

I agree completely. Though, in fairness to the rest of the offense, a lot of that production has come via the first quarter running game. But as placeholders go, Weeden's definitely been better than I expected him to be.

 

[joseephuss]

You are right. Matt hasselbeck signed a one year contract with the colts this offseason for 2 million w 1 mill signing bonus. He was available, but he is 40

I don't think that means he was available. He has been in Indy since 2013 when he signed a two year $8 million contract. He has a relationship with the Colts and Luck. He had to re-sign a new contract because his previous contract expired. That doesn't mean he was willing to look at signing with other teams. It was more a formality and he was always going to remain a Colt for the season.

 

[Sasquatch]

I'll take Weeden's sister in law over Hasselbacks any day of the week.

Shouldn't you be practicing and getting ready for the Patriots, Greg?

 

[Super_Kazuya]

Hasselbeck did okay and deserves credit, but let's not blow it out of proportion. There's a lot to be said for his veteran savvy and I did appreciate it at times last night. But I looked real close and Randle, Butler and Street don't look anything like Hilton, Johnson and Gore who have all been All-Pros. Hasselbeck would be 0 for 2 here as well.

 

[Doomsday101]

Hasselbeck did okay and deserves credit, but let's not blow it out of proportion. There's a lot to be said for his veteran savvy and I did appreciate it at times last night. But I looked real close and Randle, Butler and Street don't look anything like Hilton, Johnson and Gore who have all been All-Pros. Hasselbeck would be 0 for 2 here as well.

True and frankly he and the colts were fortunate that Jags FG kicker missed 2 FG one right before OT and the other one in OT to win the game. In the Houston game Texans have their own QB problems they have thrown 6 ints between Hoyer and Mallet 3 each and it has been back and forth of who the starting QB will be. After last nights game I would not bet on Hoyer to be named starting QB

 

[Idgit]

A word to the wise, let's not let this thread become about anything other than Matt Hasselback v. Weeden. Thanks.

 

[CATCH17]

Still trying to figure out how the defense being unable to stop the Saints in the 4th and overtime is on Weeden.

It's not.


The problem with our offense has been keeping the ball the last couple week.

The point total has been fine.



Our defensive scheme + the league rules just will never give me full confidence if we need a crucial stop.

I feel like you can chip at us all day.

Our defense is built to shut people down when our offense has a lead.

If it's a close game then we will just let teams chip away at us.

 

[texbumthelife]

Hasselback may be the best backup in the NFL. The guy has thrown for 35,000 yards and is about as savvy as any player in the league at his position.
Of course you'd like a backup to perform like that.
Oh yeah, he also has Ty Hilton, Andre Johnson, Donte Moncreif, and his two TEs.

Weedon hasn't been terrible given what they're asking of him.

But yes, our more recent backups (Orton and Kitna) were more experienced and better

He'll always be, "we'll take the ball and score" Hasselbeck to me.

 

[Idgit]

It's not.


The problem with our offense has been keeping the ball the last couple week.

The point total has been fine.



Our defensive scheme + the league rules just will never give me full confidence if we need a crucial stop.

I feel like you can chip at us all day.

Our defense is built to shut people down when our offense has a lead.

If it's a close game then we will just let teams chip away at us.

How is our defense built to play with a lead? We're good against the run and sideline to sideline. If you're making plays on us, it's over the LBs and in front of the safeties. We're built to make teams execute down the field while avoiding the strips and the takeaways.

We're not at any particular disadvantage playing from behind or in a close game on defense. In fact, so many NFL games are close, it'd be silly to design the defense any other way. Our problems on defense have been with players not making the plays we count on them to make. That goes for the DEs losing contain in the running game to the LBs being confused in coverage or unable to get off blocks in the second half v. ATL to the CBs dropping interceptions or fouling unnecessarily and negating big plays.

 

[gimmesix]

Last night a 40 year old Matt Hasselback led the colts to a victory. The second in four days. Matt spent one day in the hospital for a bacteria infection and was bed ridden for two days on a short week ( thurs night game). There are some who ask " what do you expect from a back up QB?" when discussing Weedens play. Well, i expect this type of performance.

Eight backup QBs last year didn't win any of their starts (a combined 0-17), including Brandon Weeden. Another 10 won just one each to make them 10-34. The only backups with winning records were Chase Daniel (1-0), Derek Anderson (2-0), Case Keenum (2-0) and Drew Stanton (5-3). Their success led teams starting backup QBs to finish 33-75.

So expecting Weeden to lead this team to victories in both of those games would be asking him to be one of the exceptions to the rule.

 

[CATCH17]

How is our defense built to play with a lead? We're good against the run and sideline to sideline. If you're making plays on us, it's over the LBs and in front of the safeties. We're built to make teams execute down the field while avoiding the strips and the takeaways.

We're not at any particular disadvantage playing from behind or in a close game on defense. In fact, so many NFL games are close, it'd be silly to design the defense any other way. Our problems on defense have been with players not making the plays we count on them to make. That goes for the DEs losing contain in the running game to the LBs being confused in coverage or unable to get off blocks in the second half v. ATL to the CBs dropping interceptions or fouling unnecessarily and negating big plays.

Because I think we will stop anything that is meant to go down the field.

In theory we should be really good at not giving up big plays from a scheme standpoint and for the most part you haven't seen but a couple of big plays through the air on us through 4 games and they were catch and run type plays and not really anything deep downfield.

So if a team is impatient and throwing down field that is where a defense like ours should flourish.

Where I think we get in trouble is with these elite QB's who can just play pitch and catch on short passes with their receivers all day.

 

[black label]

So Hasselback or weeden? If you said weeden you need your head checked

 

[RunDMC]

So Hasselback or weeden? If you said weeden you need your head checked

Hasselback was so impressive beating a Ryan Mallet and Brian Hoyer quarterbacked team.

Both are far superior quarterbacks to Matt Ryan and Drew Brees.

 

[Picksix]

He played the Texans and Jaguars. A bit different from playing an undefeated Falcons team and Drew Brees.

This x 100. Weeden isn't the reason we lost.

 

[Picksix]

So Hasselback or weeden? If you said weeden you need your head checked

Hasselbeck doesn't help us beat Atlanta or NO.

 

[LocimusPrime]

misguide

Weeden apologists run strong in this thread.

I don't think that means he was available. He has been in Indy since 2013 when he signed a two year $8 million contract. He has a relationship with the Colts and Luck. He had to re-sign a new contract because his previous contract expired. That doesn't mean he was willing to look at signing with other teams. It was more a formality and he was always going to remain a Colt for the season.

Fair enough. Good points

 

[Idgit]

Because I think we will stop anything that is meant to go down the field.

In theory we should be really good at not giving up big plays from a scheme standpoint and for the most part you haven't seen but a couple of big plays through the air on us through 4 games and they were catch and run type plays and not really anything deep downfield.

So if a team is impatient and throwing down field that is where a defense like ours should flourish.

Where I think we get in trouble is with these elite QB's who can just play pitch and catch on short passes with their receivers all day.

Well, I'd agree with all that. But it doesn't mean that we're at a disadvantage playing from behind. If you have an elite QB completing high percentage passes, you beat that by forcing a turnover and by tackling well and making them drive until somebody makes a mistake. We're situated ok for that normally. Problem has been, with replacement players in, we haven't had everybody managing their own responsibilities, and it's bitten us. We've got a challenge this week in that NE has a lot of weapons, and they don't really make a lot of mistakes.