The Matt Schaub Thread

[1/28/01]

I wasn't siding with him. Flacco's was a poor throw. But I agree with his overall premise the recrivers seem to be playing quite well recently. Esp buck and aiken.

Oline has got worse though

Yeah, Givens, Aiken and Buck look great. Sorta crazy to see with Flacco on the "sideline". Unexplainable.

[callahan09]

Okay. For the record, Givens didn't misplay it or overrun it. It was underthrown. Teeny tiny difference, ha.

 

First you were disrespectful to me by responding to a tiny piece of a large post that I made, and making no argument whatsoever, just dismiss it by saying "this is hilarious."  How about you make an actual point rather than making a disrespectful one-liner with no reasoning at all to back it up?  Now you say this, but post nothing to prove your point, or even explain how you're right and I'm wrong.  How exactly did did Givens *NOT* overrun and missplay that ball?

 

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2015111506/2015/REG10/jaguars@ravens?icampaign=GC_schedule_rr#menu=gameinfo%7CcontentId%3A0ap3000000579991&tab=videos

 

He never even beats House.  They are step for step the whole way, until House notices where the ball is going and makes a play on it while Givens doesn't and just keeps going.

 

 

 

 

OK, so at the 20 yard line, they're step for step.  At the 15 yard line they're step for step.  At the 10 yard line, the ball is being caught, while Givens is 3 yards upfield.  Watch it in game-speed on the video link I posted.  Givens just outright keeps running and never makes a play on the ball.  Why is it that the defender can look up, find the ball, and figure out how to make a play on it, but Givens can't?  The ball actually does get thrown significantly to the outside, where Givens should have had by far a better play on it than the defender, who was to the inside of Givens relative to the ball, but Givens, once again I say, doesn't play the ball, overruns it, and gives the defender a free shot to make a leap to the outside to go come down with it.

Edited December 7, 2015 by callahan09

[callahan09]

Now, for the Givens catch vs the Browns:

 

 

 

 

At the 25, he's got multiple steps on the defender.  At the 20, he's already slowed down and turned around to start playing for the ball.  At the 22.5 the ball has arrived and the defender has had time to catch up and almost gets his hands on the ball.  But Givens watched the ball, slowed down, played it smart, and made the catch.  Something he absolutely did not do on the Flacco throw in the Jags game.

[GhostofGrbac]

My point is that they're essentially the same throw... one is an interception, one is a catch, and the biggest difference between the two is how the receiver played it, not the throw.

 

The biggest difference is one was severely underthrown (Flacco). The other one was slightly underthrown. 

 

I have no idea how you can look at those 2 plays and say they're essentially the same throws. 

[beanfigger]

Better play on the ball? Sure. But to expect a receiver to essentially stop in full stride and bail the QB out is hilarious. Can be done, sure. But to absolve Flacco and make it sound like the pick was more on Givens than Flacco is just the ridiculous stuff that fuels the "Flacco haters".

 

I am not defending Flacco for that one. I was saying it would have been nice if Givens played the ball better (like the defender did, but I guess he's a better athlete because only he was able to "essentially stop in full stride"), but it was a poor throw. Yes, of course it's nice when a receiver bails out the QB, but that never happens here. I was saying it would have been nice.

[beanfigger]

The biggest difference is one was severely underthrown (Flacco). The other one was slightly underthrown. 

 

I have no idea how you can look at those 2 plays and say they're essentially the same throws. 

 

The two throws I compared in another post were the one that was batted away by Matthieu in Arizona and the one he caught from Schaub. I think those throws were almost exactly the same, except the defender made a spectacular play on one and the defender was nowhere to be seen in the other.

[callahan09]

The biggest difference is one was severely underthrown (Flacco). The other one was slightly underthrown. 

 

I have no idea how you can look at those 2 plays and say they're essentially the same throws. 

I have no idea how you can say that.  Prove your point.  Did you see the videos?  Did you see the screen caps I posted above?

 

To me, Flacco's is usually less likely to be intercepted in the NFL, as long as the receiver plays it correctly.  He has the positional advantage as they're step for step and the ball is to the outside, the side that Givens is on relative to the defender, and if they both play the ball at the same spot, Givens has the position advantage and at worse the ball should fall incomplete, but this is the pass that Flacco routinely got a DPI call on from Torrey Smith as Torrey goes to play the ball and the defender can't avoid contacting him during his attempt to make the catch, thus DPI, or at worst just an incomplete pass.  Schaub's is probably more likely to be intercepted, regardless of the fact that Givens played it smartly, precisely because it was so underthrown and that Givens had a couple steps on him.  Givens has to stop and sit on it and gives the defender ample time to make up ground and get to the ball, that's how while Givens is sitting there waiting for the ball to get to him, the defender could have gotten to it and jumped in front of him to intercept it.  The defender very nearly did just that, despite Givens being wide open in front of the defender when the ball was thrown and for most of the time while the ball was in the air.  On the Flacco throw, Givens never wound up beating House, never had a step on him, and so both of them were step for step the whole way and if they'd both decided to play the ball at the same time, it shouldn't get intercepted.  The positional advantage was Givens' but he squandered it and didn't take advantage, overran it, didn't play the ball, and so the defender was left alone with the play on the ball.

[callahan09]

OK, someone is negging my posts above with the photos of the two throws, can someone please explain to me how those posts are detrimental to this board?  Because that's what a neg means to me.  How are those contributions not helpful to the discussion at hand?  Can my anonymous disagreer please explain to me how one throw was so much worse than the other?  The point I'm making here is that in one case, the receiver played the ball, and in the other, he didn't.  They were both underthrows.  I don't understand how you can call the Flacco throw worse than the Schaub throw?  Explain it to me.  What's worse about it?  You can't just say, like I've seen here, that it was worse, and leave it at that.  "It was severely underthrown, the other was slightly underthrown."  That's NOT an answer!  Explain in what way one was more egregious than the other, and keep in mind that in one case, the receiver was step for step with the defender, and in the other case the receiver had multiple steps wide open on his defender.

 

I've shown you evidence of where the ball was, where the defenders were, where the receiver was going, etc, and I'm seeing two underthrows that should have both probably just been incomplete passes.  One was against a worse defender and Givens played it perfectly and caught it.  The other was versus a better defender, and Givens played it completely incorrectly, and thus it was intercepted.  The point I'm making is that one makes the QB look, the other makes the QB look bad, even though there is hardly any difference between the throws, and that the Schaub throw was the best possible outcome for an underthrow like that, and Flacco's was the worst possible outcome for that throw, and that if Givens played Flacco's like he played Schaub's, it doesn't get intercepted.

 

I contend that the Flacco throw was of the same nature that Flacco always threw to Torrey Smith, and Torrey didn't let those get intercepted and usually drew a DPI if it wasn't caught.

Edited December 7, 2015 by callahan09

[GhostofGrbac]

I have no idea how you can say that.  Prove your point.  Did you see the videos?  Did you see the screen caps I posted above?

 

To me, Flacco's is usually less likely to be intercepted in the NFL, as long as the receiver plays it correctly.  He has the positional advantage as they're step for step and the ball is to the outside, the side that Givens is on relative to the defender, and if they both play the ball at the same spot, Givens has the position advantage and at worse the ball should fall incomplete, but this is the pass that Flacco routinely got a DPI call on from Torrey Smith as Torrey goes to play the ball and the defender can't avoid contacting him during his attempt to make the catch, thus DPI, or at worst just an incomplete pass.  Schaub's is probably more likely to be intercepted, regardless of the fact that Givens played it smartly, precisely because it was so underthrown and that Givens had a couple steps on him.  Givens has to stop and sit on it and gives the defender ample time to make up ground and get to the ball, that's how while Givens is sitting there waiting for the ball to get to him, the defender could have gotten to it and jumped in front of him to intercept it.  The defender very nearly did just that, despite Givens being wide open in front of the defender when the ball was thrown and for most of the time while the ball was in the air.  On the Flacco throw, Givens never wound up beating House, never had a step on him, and so both of them were step for step the whole way and if they'd both decided to play the ball at the same time, it shouldn't get intercepted.  The positional advantage was Givens' but he squandered it and didn't take advantage, overran it, didn't play the ball, and so the defender was left alone with the play on the ball.

 

The videos prove my point. On the Flacco throw GIvens would have had to stop his momentum and come back to the ball. On the Schaub throw all he had to do was slow down a little bit.

 

Schaub's throw was nowhere near as underthrown as Joe's was. If you truly think that, then there's no need in continuing this discussion. 

[GhostofGrbac]

 "It was severely underthrown, the other was slightly underthrown."  That's NOT an answer!  Explain in what way one was more egregious than the other, and keep in mind that in one case, the receiver was step for step with the defender, and in the other case the receiver had multiple steps wide open on his defender.

 

Are you serious with this? Explain why one was more egregious? One was freaking intercepted and the other one wasn't. 

[GhostofGrbac]

The two throws I compared in another post were the one that was batted away by Matthieu in Arizona and the one he caught from Schaub. I think those throws were almost exactly the same, except the defender made a spectacular play on one and the defender was nowhere to be seen in the other.

 

I agree. Those throws were very similar. Neither are comparable to the throw in the Jaguars game. 

[callahan09]

Are you serious with this? Explain why one was more egregious? One was freaking intercepted and the other one wasn't. 

 

The videos prove my point. On the Flacco throw GIvens would have had to stop his momentum and come back to the ball. On the Schaub throw all he had to do was slow down a little bit.

 

Schaub's throw was nowhere near as underthrown as Joe's was. If you truly think that, then there's no need in continuing this discussion. 

 

Explain to me how Givens wouldn't be able to make a play on that ball when the defender, who was literally step for step with him the entire way down the field, WAS able to do just that?  The statement that my photo evidence is disputing was 1/28/01's claim that:

 

 

 

Okay. For the record, Givens didn't misplay it or overrun it. It was underthrown. Teeny tiny difference, ha.

 

OK, so if he didn't overrun it or misplay it, then why didn't the DEFENDER overrun it?  Why was the DEFENDER able to make a play on the ball and catch it?  Despite the fact that the defender was actually slightly IN FRONT of Givens for most of the play down the field, he was lockstep with him the entire way and Givens had positional advantage on the outside where the ball was thrown.  Givens keeps running, doesn't adjust to the ball AT ALL, and the defender adjusted to the ball and made a play on it.  If you're going to say that Givens didn't misplay it, then you're going to have to show how his reaction on that play was the correct one.  It's OBVIOUS that it wasn't correct.  If you watch them run down the field together, WR and defender, you can see that they both have the same chance at the ball, but the ball goes to the outside and Givens is on the outside. Explain to me how that ball gets intercepted like that with Givens 3 yards nowhere near the ball, except that Givens didn't play the ball and House did?  And if Givens didn't play it, and House did, which is objectively what happened, then how can that not be considered "misplaying the ball"?

 

Are you serious with this? Explain why one was more egregious? One was freaking intercepted and the other one wasn't. 

 

You're not helping yourself, if that's the level of argument you're going to bring to the table.  The entire point of my argument is that the RESULTS were a function of the WR's reaction on the play.  So you can't dispute my point by saying "Look at the results!"  

[1/28/01]

How exactly did did Givens *NOT* overrun and missplay that ball?

Because it wasn't a back shoulder throw, wasn't a fade, wasn't an out route, wasn't a screen, it wasn't a drag, it wasn't a curl and it wasn't a crossing route. It was a 9 route that was poorly thrown, underthrown and intercepted. I don't need stills and videos to show that. And sorry I hurt your feelings.

[jimmypowder]

Matt will continue his streak of at least one more pick six against Seattle. 

 

I'm guessing he has the all time consecutive game streak for this ,right?

[callahan09]

Because it wasn't a back shoulder throw, wasn't a fade, wasn't an out route, wasn't a screen, it wasn't a drag, it wasn't a curl and it wasn't a crossing route. It was a 9 route that was poorly thrown, underthrown and intercepted. I don't need stills and videos to show that. And sorry I hurt your feelings.

So in your mind, the receiver isn't responsible for looking at the ball and making a play on it?  If the route says "go fast", then you just go fast, even if the ball is in the air and you're already under where it's going to land, you just keep running, beyond where the ball is going to go, and that's the considered an acceptable decision by the receiver?  Even when the defender, who isn't supposed to be as good at playing the ball as the receiver, demonstrates the ability to play the ball and catch it?  The receiver has no responsibility whatsoever to respond to the situation?

[GhostofGrbac]

Explain to me how Givens wouldn't be able to make a play on that ball when the defender, who was literally step for step with him the entire way down the field, WAS able to do just that?  The statement that my photo evidence is disputing was 1/28/01's claim that:

 

 

You're not helping yourself, if that's the level of argument you're going to bring to the table.  The entire point of my argument is that the RESULTS were a function of the WR's reaction on the play.  So you can't dispute my point by saying "Look at the results!"  

 

Givens was clearly expecting the ball to be thrown in front of him. His momentum was carrying him towards the endzone. Do you really expect him to be able to stop on a dime, and come back to a severely underthrown ball?

 

I get that you have an agenda. You've shown it here and on the other board. You always want to blame someone else for Joe's mistakes. It makes having a discussion with you nearly impossible. So lets agree to disagree and end it. We've had literally the same exact discussion on the other board. 

[arnie_uk]

It was a poor throw. Givens also didn't look back for the ball. At the most he could have stopped the int, but his chances of catching it were slim to none

[flynismo]

OK, someone is negging my posts above with the photos of the two throws, can someone please explain to me how those posts are detrimental to this board? Because that's what a neg means to me. How are those contributions not helpful to the discussion at hand? Can my anonymous disagreer please explain to me how one throw was so much worse than the other? The point I'm making here is that in one case, the receiver played the ball, and in the other, he didn't. They were both underthrows. I don't understand how you can call the Flacco throw worse than the Schaub throw? Explain it to me. What's worse about it? You can't just say, like I've seen here, that it was worse, and leave it at that. "It was severely underthrown, the other was slightly underthrown." That's NOT an answer! Explain in what way one was more egregious than the other, and keep in mind that in one case, the receiver was step for step with the defender, and in the other case the receiver had multiple steps wide open on his defender.

I've shown you evidence of where the ball was, where the defenders were, where the receiver was going, etc, and I'm seeing two underthrows that should have both probably just been incomplete passes. One was against a worse defender and Givens played it perfectly and caught it. The other was versus a better defender, and Givens played it completely incorrectly, and thus it was intercepted. The point I'm making is that one makes the QB look, the other makes the QB look bad, even though there is hardly any difference between the throws, and that the Schaub throw was the best possible outcome for an underthrow like that, and Flacco's was the worst possible outcome for that throw, and that if Givens played Flacco's like he played Schaub's, it doesn't get intercepted.

I contend that the Flacco throw was of the same nature that Flacco always threw to Torrey Smith, and Torrey didn't let those get intercepted and usually drew a DPI if it wasn't caught.

Wear those negs with pride. Just means that your argument was too strong for the simpletons who negged you...it's a sign that you "win"

[flynismo]

Explain to me how Givens wouldn't be able to make a play on that ball when the defender, who was literally step for step with him the entire way down the field, WAS able to do just that? The statement that my photo evidence is disputing was 1/28/01's claim that:

OK, so if he didn't overrun it or misplay it, then why didn't the DEFENDER overrun it? Why was the DEFENDER able to make a play on the ball and catch it? Despite the fact that the defender was actually slightly IN FRONT of Givens for most of the play down the field, he was lockstep with him the entire way and Givens had positional advantage on the outside where the ball was thrown. Givens keeps running, doesn't adjust to the ball AT ALL, and the defender adjusted to the ball and made a play on it. If you're going to say that Givens didn't misplay it, then you're going to have to show how his reaction on that play was the correct one. It's OBVIOUS that it wasn't correct. If you watch them run down the field together, WR and defender, you can see that they both have the same chance at the ball, but the ball goes to the outside and Givens is on the outside. Explain to me how that ball gets intercepted like that with Givens 3 yards nowhere near the ball, except that Givens didn't play the ball and House did? And if Givens didn't play it, and House did, which is objectively what happened, then how can that not be considered "misplaying the ball"?

This is the point you're making that everyone chooses to ignore. Obviously it was a poor throw...just as obviously as the defender knew exactly what was coming as well as Givens did. Difference is, the defender was physically and mentally capable of catching the pass...it isn't unreasonable to expect the same from the receiver. Of course, all this could be avoided with a better throw, which you more or less said as well, but sometimes people like to argue just for the sake of it

[1/28/01]

So in your mind, the receiver isn't responsible for looking at the ball and making a play on it? If the route says "go fast", then you just go fast, even if the ball is in the air and you're already under where it's going to land, you just keep running, beyond where the ball is going to go, and that's the considered an acceptable decision by the receiver? Even when the defender, who isn't supposed to be as good at playing the ball as the receiver, demonstrates the ability to play the ball and catch it? The receiver has no responsibility whatsoever to respond to the situation?

Yeah, that gross exaggeration is what I said. Ha, carry on.

[PerpetuallyBored74]

First you were disrespectful to me by responding to a tiny piece of a large post that I made, and making no argument whatsoever, just dismiss it by saying "this is hilarious."  How about you make an actual point rather than making a disrespectful one-liner with no reasoning at all to back it up?  Now you say this, but post nothing to prove your point, or even explain how you're right and I'm wrong.  How exactly did did Givens *NOT* overrun and missplay that ball?

 

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2015111506/2015/REG10/jaguars@ravens?icampaign=GC_schedule_rr#menu=gameinfo%7CcontentId%3A0ap3000000579991&tab=videos

 

He never even beats House.  They are step for step the whole way, until House notices where the ball is going and makes a play on it while Givens doesn't and just keeps going.

 

 

 

 

OK, so at the 20 yard line, they're step for step.  At the 15 yard line they're step for step.  At the 10 yard line, the ball is being caught, while Givens is 3 yards upfield.  Watch it in game-speed on the video link I posted.  Givens just outright keeps running and never makes a play on the ball.  Why is it that the defender can look up, find the ball, and figure out how to make a play on it, but Givens can't?  The ball actually does get thrown significantly to the outside, where Givens should have had by far a better play on it than the defender, who was to the inside of Givens relative to the ball, but Givens, once again I say, doesn't play the ball, overruns it, and gives the defender a free shot to make a leap to the outside to go come down with it.

 

Because House is tracking and playing the ball the whole way, while Givens is focusing entirely on running his route and not paying any attention to the ball ASSUMING that it's been thrown further downfield and that he needs to race to that spot to make sure he arrives on time.

But this is common with most WRs, only the exceptional ones will look back and adjust more often than not.

Joe did make a poor throw. He'd been doing that all year because of his poor footwork.

So, really what were the coaches doing then. Why didn't they focus on fixing this flaw in Joe's game?

That to me has been the real issue: How come more heat hasn't been directed at Mornhinweg?

Thought he was supposed to be a top QB coach.

[GrimCoconut]

Because House is tracking and playing the ball the whole way, while Givens is focusing entirely on running his route and not paying any attention to the ball ASSUMING that it's been thrown further downfield and that he needs to race to that spot to make sure he arrives on time.

But this is common with most WRs, only the exceptional ones will look back and adjust more often than not.

Joe did make a poor throw. He'd been doing that all year because of his poor footwork.

So, really what were the coaches doing then. Why didn't they focus on fixing this flaw in Joe's game?

That to me has been the real issue: How come more heat hasn't been directed at Mornhinweg?

Thought he was supposed to be a top QB coach.

I want Mornhinweg gone. 

[PerpetuallyBored74]

I want Mornhinweg gone. 

Honestly, why is it so hard to find decent help these days? (at QB coach).

Bring back Zorn. He got along great with Joe and seemed to know his stuff being a decent ex-QB himself.

And with Cam gone there shouldn't be any more friction.

[redrum52]

I think Matt should change his jersey and wear jersey #6.

I just came in this thread about to post this.

[Tenacious Faulker]

ha, well, some of us believe Flacco is a glorified game manager along the lines of Cutler, Cousins, etc...I'm wondering if we should require mental fitness testing before you are allowed to post

Are we STILL having a "is Joe vs Matt?" debate?  All these pick-6's should've settled this by now.

[FlocksGottaFeed]

Are we STILL having a "is Joe vs Matt?" debate?  All these pick-6's should've settled this by now.

Only if you're talking about Matty Ice. Joe Cool and Matty Ice entered the league together. Have been prospected to be 2 of the next 'elite' class and haven't had continuity at the OC position throughout their careers (Organizationally problematic at best).

 

Now (for our Ravens only), throw-in a 2nd string journeyman QB and ask him to pick-up on the system in real-time, over 1/2 way through the season. Schaub is on an island. Recently, I feel sorry for the guy, but I'm impressed with him, as well. He keeps fighting and pushing-on under incredible odds with less talent around him than we had earlier in season. Some how we've still managed to stay competitive. We've got to give him that - at the very least.

[MTRavensFan]

Only if you're talking about Matty Ice. Joe Cool and Matty Ice entered the league together. Have been prospected to be 2 of the next 'elite' class and haven't had continuity at the OC position throughout their careers (Organizationally problematic at best).

 

Now (for our Ravens only), throw-in a 2nd string journeyman QB and ask him to pick-up on the system in real-time, over 1/2 way through the season. Schaub is on an island. Recently, I feel sorry for the guy, but I'm impressed with him, as well. He keeps fighting and pushing-on under incredible odds with less talent around him than we had earlier in season. Some how we've still managed to stay competitive. We've got to give him that - at the very least.

Totally agree with this.

Schaub hung in there and continued fighting to the end, despite getting the crap beat out of him, and didn't fall apart. He earned a lot of respect from me last Sunday for his toughness.

[Tenacious Faulker]

Only if you're talking about Matty Ice. Joe Cool and Matty Ice entered the league together. Have been prospected to be 2 of the next 'elite' class and haven't had continuity at the OC position throughout their careers (Organizationally problematic at best).

 

Now (for our Ravens only), throw-in a 2nd string journeyman QB and ask him to pick-up on the system in real-time, over 1/2 way through the season. Schaub is on an island. Recently, I feel sorry for the guy, but I'm impressed with him, as well. He keeps fighting and pushing-on under incredible odds with less talent around him than we had earlier in season. Some how we've still managed to stay competitive. We've got to give him that - at the very least.

Since Matty Ice is not a factor here, I don;t feel the need to debate that.  Joe has been the better QB unless you prefer stats over wins.

In

terms of Schaub and Flacco, this thread becomes absurd.  Schaub also isn;t a journeyman.  He's a Pro Bowl QB with 3 4000+ yd seasons, something Joe has never done.  But again those are just stats and not wins which Joe still has an advantage despite Schaubs longer career.

 

The problem OC is really more about quality than continuity.  Kubiiak blew all the others away and this worked for Joe, justy as it did for Schaub all those years Houston.  They are similar players that way, but Joe has a bit more of an advantage in terms of physical ability.  The only OC worth keeping was Kubiak and that wasn't possible.  Trestman may stick around due to his LACk of siccess here.  Had the Ravens made the playoffs he too mught be gone in 2016.  Unfortunately I think we get continuity at OC by default with Trestman and I'm not sure I want that right now.

[rmw10]

Schaub missed practice again today, which means we might actually have to see Jimmy Clausen throw a football for the Baltimore Ravens.

 

 

What a year...

[PurpleCity5]

Schaub missed practice again today, which means we might actually have to see Jimmy Clausen throw a football for the Baltimore Ravens.

What a year...

Well....Thats....something....