The Matt Schaub Thread

[darklight1216]

I think this is an interesting question. Why were are receivers seemingly more open? I have a few theories that include ahorter, more simple routes, and more effort knowing they were playing with a backup.

You can't discount the competition either. I don't really remember the finer details of the 1st Browns game, but the offense did score 30 points and they didn't have as much help from the ST.

I'll be interested to see if the receivers can keep it up.

[Militant X 1]

There was no illusion on Monday. Our guys were running wide open, especially early on in the game.

 

There sure wasn't!  That's the whole point of the question made; "why were the receivers so wide open for Schaub and not Flacco?"  There seems to be a few variables for this.

 

Yes, as I've been saying, play design worked well. And yes, he did take a lot more short drop backs, so the ball did come out quickly. You are right.

Either way, the receivers were open. They have not been open all year. We were playing the Browns awful defense and ran a solid scheme. We even ran a double move on the deep route with Givens. I didn't know we had those in our playbook.

 

I said this earlier! lol!

 

I think this is an interesting question. Why were are receivers seemingly more open? I have a few theories that include ahorter, more simple routes, and more effort knowing they were playing with a backup.

 

I believe that the coaches catered to the strengths of Schaub being that of those simple and short routes.  Again, as I mentioned earlier that makes for a quicker "release" or "throw" (however you want to say it) of the ball to the receivers enabling them to make a play.

 

I think we are more likely to see him hit spots and to "throw guys open" with anticipatory throws than we are with Joe. Of course, Schaub doesn't have the same zip on throws that he once did.

He also throws the inexplicable pick regularly but so does Joe,(at least this year).

 

The "throwing guys open" concept is another interesting variable.

 

You can't discount the competition either. I don't really remember the finer details of the 1st Browns game, but the offense did score 30 points and they didn't have as much help from the ST.

I'll be interested to see if the receivers can keep it up.

 

That will be interesting to see.

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

There sure wasn't!  That's the whole point of the question made; "why were the receivers so wide open for Schaub and not Flacco?"  There seems to be a few variables for this.

 

 

I said this earlier! lol!

 

 

I believe that the coaches catered to the strengths of Schaub being that of those simple and short routes.  Again, as I mentioned earlier that makes for a quicker "release" or "throw" (however you want to say it) of the ball to the receivers enabling them to make a play.

 

 

The "throwing guys open" concept is another interesting variable.

 

 

That will be interesting to see.

 

I dont think them being wide open is as much Schaub vs Flacco as it is Browns vs rest of NFL.

 

If i remember correctly guys like Ross, Aiken, Juice and the TE's were wide open as well when we played them at home (until late at least). But early on Joe had easy throws all day. The juice TD comes to mind, and not an open receiver, but Flaccos walk into the end zone on the PA roll out is just another example of how poor the Browns defense really is.

 

Not saying that's all of it, but I think its probably a lot of the reason. But we'll certainly have an opportunity to find out soon. If they continue to get open then we'll have some more questions to ask and it'd be fair to wonder if Schaub and the offense is doing something different and more successful.

 

If/when they arent able to get the same separation going forward, I think it's pretty safe to assume that it was just the Browns.

Edited December 2, 2015 by BOLDnPurPnBlacK

[beanfigger]

There sure wasn't! That's the whole point of the question made; "why were the receivers so wide open for Schaub and not Flacco?" There seems to be a few variables for this.

I said this earlier! lol!

Yes, and I keep saying to you that it's a good question. (I also keep posting my opinion in response, but I won't this time because it's clearly being ignored. See: any of my several responses to you above when you ask that question.) Also, I said "quickly" not "quicker". Edited December 2, 2015 by beanfigger

[FlocksGottaFeed]

Schaub's throwing motion is slightly-quicker than Flacco's, but could become a problem if we don't change-up the scheme from time-to-time to throw-off defenses. His motion is perfect for dink-and-dunk, but his arm strength is nowhere close to Joe's (when it needs to get there fast) nor has he shown the ability to change speed, touch and distance when needed, yet.

Those are easy reads for INTs.

 

That said, I think the 'pass-happy' offensive schemes we've been running need to be re-examined and/or designed. We truly need to 'mask' everything we've done recently or we'll put Schaub in a bad situation (especially late-game situations as he loses some of his arm quickness and reads).

[FlocksGottaFeed]

The receivers are more open because they have adapted. They are getting more reps, simple reads, possible opportunities to have the ball delivered to them. They're all a possible 1st read in a 'dink-and-dunk' scheme based-on how the defense aligns and reacts.

 

They have evolved and adapted to NFL play. They are also trying to win 2016 open spots (that's incentive).

[beanfigger]

The receivers are more open because they have adapted. They are getting more reps, simple reads, possible opportunities to have the ball delivered to them. They're all a possible 1st read in a 'dink-and-dunk' scheme based-on how the defense aligns and reacts.

They have evolved and adapted to NFL play. They are also trying to win 2016 open spots (that's incentive).

All good points. I think Trestman is "adapting", as well. Someone still has to calls those dink and dunk plays.

[Kid87]

Is it true we worked out Ryan Mallett? ?

[jimmypowder]

I think Trestman and Joe are a bad match with Joe's strong intermediate passing game

but he and Schaub are a good match with his dink and dunk offensive scheme and

considering Schaub's weak arm .

So Joe's not going anywhere , so where does that leave Trestman ?

He is as good as gone the way I see it .

[flynismo]

Didn't you asked earlier Fly "why can't these guys get open for Flacco when he's playing?"  Now, you're saying he has no one to throw to.  C'mon!  lol!  Schaub threw to the same cats on the field that Flacco had minus Smith, Sr. and Brown and they were open.

Yes I did. And those are not contradictory statements, because again, it was one game against a terrible defense

[flynismo]

think schaub is more willing to make the throw before the WR is actually open which gives the illusion the WR was open but it also leads to his vintage picks.

That may be the case, but in context of this discussion -- the receivers were clearly getting better and more consistent seperation. And it has nothing to do with one QB releasing the ball .000234 seconds sooner than the other, or having a throwing motion nanoseconds faster than the other. Separation is seperation, there's no mirage or illusions of anything, people are trying to make it more complicated than it actually is.

[Tru11]

That may be the case, but in context of this discussion -- the receivers were clearly getting better and more consistent seperation. And it has nothing to do with one QB releasing the ball .000234 seconds sooner than the other, or having a throwing motion nanoseconds faster than the other. Separation is seperation, there's no mirage or illusions of anything, people are trying to make it more complicated than it actually is.

 

so to you there is no difference between throwing a receiver open and throwing to an open receiver?

[A Fish Called Yanda]

Is it true we worked out Ryan Mallett? ?

 

From everything I saw during his time at the Texans, Mallett looks like an annoyingly self-centered guy.

 

I would prefer no backup than having him on the Ravens.

Edited December 3, 2015 by A Fish Called Yanda

[Purple Punishment]

Schaub is going to be due a 1 mil bonus if he plays next game I think (10% of snaps, so assuming we play roughly the same # of snaps per game, it'd go from 1/16 to 2/16). This bonus would basically be incurred as a cap penalty the next season I believe. I'm sure Ozzie would rather avoid this if possible. It may not sound like much, but $1 mil matters in a tight cap.

This salary bonus issue, Schaub's poor performance, and Clausen knowing Trestman's system... I wonder if Schaub will be starting next week. I would like to see Clausen play.

Jimmy Clausen, starting QB for the Ravens.... I would never have though it would even be possible! Is this bizarro worlld

[flynismo]

so to you there is no difference between throwing a receiver open and throwing to an open receiver?

 

Do you even know what it means to thow a receiver open? Lol. If you did, you'd know that is the polar opposite of Schaub

 

It doesn't mean that you throw the ball somewhere, the WR follows it and in the process, he magically gains seperation from the defender. Throwing a guy open means that you put the ball precisely where only the receiver has a chance to make a play on the ball, whether he gained any seperation or is covered like stink on poo is irrelevant. Flacco does it all the time -- throwing into impossible windows even when the defender is all over the receiver. Of course, that also backfires on him occassionally, but I digress...Schaub was throwing to open receivers all day long. He was not "throwing them open"

Edited December 3, 2015 by flynismo

[GrimCoconut]

When we stopped relying on him to win the game we started to do well. I think it would be cool if he looked good enough that a team wants to sign him next year and we get a compensatory pick for him. I think that says all I need to say about my opinion of Matt.

[beanfigger]

Do you even know what it means to thow a receiver open? Lol. If you did, you'd know that is the polar opposite of Schaub

It doesn't mean that you throw the ball somewhere, the WR follows it and in the process, he magically gains seperation from the defender. Throwing a guy open means that you put the ball precisely where only the receiver has a chance to make a play on the ball, whether he gained any seperation or is covered like stink on poo is irrelevant. Flacco does it all the time -- throwing into impossible windows even when the defender is all over the receiver. Of course, that also backfires on him occassionally, but I digress...Schaub was throwing to open receivers all day long. He was not "throwing them open"

So you're telling me it wasn't that Schaub gave the stink eye to the defenders before he threw it to make them run away from the receivers in fear? You're absolutely 100% sure he was not doing that? You know for a fact he wasn't sneaking subliminal messages into his cadence or that he hadn't given the receivers old bay cologne because he knew the Browns DBs were allergic to shellfish? These are the outrageuous claims you're making right now, am I right?

Sheesh... It just cannot be that the receivers were getting open for him when they hadn't for Flacco. That's too simple and reasonable an explanation to be true. Don't you see that?

Edited December 3, 2015 by beanfigger

[flynismo]

So you're telling me it wasn't that Schaub gave the stink eye to the defenders before he threw it to make them run away from the receivers in fear? You're absolutely 100% sure he was not doing that? You know for a fact he wasn't sneaking subliminal messages into his cadence or that he hadn't given the receivers old bay cologne because he knew the Browns DBs were allergic to shellfish? These are the outrageuous claims you're making right now, am I right?

Sheesh... It just cannot be that the receivers were getting open for him when they hadn't for Flacco. That's too simple and reasonable an explanation to be true. Don't you see that?

actually you maybe onto something... the thought of Schaub trying to stink eye a defender likely caused the defender to laugh so hard that his vision was blurred by tears, giving our guys the advantage they needed...

[Militant X 1]

Yes I did. And those are not contradictory statements, because again, it was one game against a terrible defense

 

We played that terrible defense 2x with 2 different QB's and 2 different results from our receivers.  No?

[BmoreBird22]

We played that terrible defense 2x with 2 different QB's and 2 different results from our receivers.  No?

Could it be that Joe Haden not playing was a huge help to the receivers? 

 

No, that'd be too simple...

[flynismo]

We played that terrible defense 2x with 2 different QB's and 2 different results from our receivers.  No?

Right. So, from a broad perspective, which is more likely --

 

1. We did something differently on offense

2. Cleveland was missing key defensive players

3. Schaub has developed some curious ability to cause our WR to get open (even though this curious ability has rarely, if ever, been present for Schaub at any point in his career)

 

You can pick two of those three options, if you wish!

[beanfigger]

Schaub had one more completion and two more interceptions against Cleveland on the same amount of attempts as Joe.

[Tank 92]

Three words. No Joe Haden.

[Tru11]

Do you even know what it means to thow a receiver open? Lol. If you did, you'd know that is the polar opposite of Schaub

 

It doesn't mean that you throw the ball somewhere, the WR follows it and in the process, he magically gains seperation from the defender. Throwing a guy open means that you put the ball precisely where only the receiver has a chance to make a play on the ball, whether he gained any seperation or is covered like stink on poo is irrelevant. Flacco does it all the time -- throwing into impossible windows even when the defender is all over the receiver. Of course, that also backfires on him occassionally, but I digress...Schaub was throwing to open receivers all day long. He was not "throwing them open"

 

im not talking about schaub and flacco.

 

im asking you if you think there is no difference...

[Tru11]

BTW joe haden got injured in the first browns game and missed a good part of it and a few games after that.

 

also im pretty sure we had a healthier offense in our first browns game compared to this 1....

 

also first game we also lost almost half of the secondary and doom early which pretty much lead to all the points given up on defense although we could not cover a RB or TE in neither game...

[The Raven]

Could it be that Joe Haden not playing was a huge help to the receivers? 

 

No, that'd be too simple...

 

Way too obvious, too.

[Edgar]

. I don't know how at this point one could argue that Schaub is better than Joe. I'm not sure anyone is.

I expect a greater degree of excuse making for his(Schaubs) horrible decision making and general poor performance(should this come to fruition) than I would expect to read being made for Joe.

Joe ought to be held to a higher standard as a top ten qb and I'm not sure why it's difficult to concede that he looked terrible in several games this year.

[BmoreBird22]

BTW joe haden got injured in the first browns game and missed a good part of it and a few games after that.

He was injured in the fourth quarter and the Ravens then subsequently scored ten points

[Tenacious Faulker]

Are we really having a "Is Schaub better then Joe conversation?"  What bthe hell is wrong with you people?

[flynismo]

Joe ought to be held to a higher standard as a top ten qb and I'm not sure why it's difficult to concede that he looked terrible in several games this year.

Joe IS held to a higher standard, as evidenced by the criticism he recieves if he were to pass gas without excusing himself.

Nobody denies he could have played better against Denver, but that is the only game he stunk it up this year. Considering his lack of weapons, going against a defense that people on NFL network were comparing to our 2000 defense, no excuses needed for it.