Lol, sorry, you're painting an incredibly inaccurate picture by saying he wasnt horrible for 3+ quarters. I have the breakdown right here: 1st Quarter 3 drives 1 completion 4 attempts 4 yards passing 2nd Quarter 3 drives 6 completions 12 attempts (50%) 60 yards (5 ypa) During this quarter, we had a scoring drive that resulted in 3 points. Out of the 6 drives, we had one scoring drive that resulted in a FG. The other 5 drives, Brock was 3 for 11 for 26 yards. Overall stats for 1st half: 7 for 17, 54 yards. 0 TDs, 0 INTs. (And yes, it matters that it's against the Colts....these numbers would be poor against any defense in the NFL, regardless). 3rd Quarter The first drive of this quarter was a TD drive. However, we had rushed for 50 yards before Brock had his first pass attempt. This wasnt a drive led by Brock, he was just there to hand it off. He did end the drive well...but he passed for 25 yards on the entire drive. We had 2 more drives before our comeback...during those two drives, Brock combined for 1 for 3, 13 yards, and 1 interception. Therefore, thru 3.5 quarters of play, Brock had done the following: 12 for 25, 102 yards, 0 TD, 1 INT. YPA = 4.08. QB rating = 42.4 Yes, absolutely horrible. On the flip side, the last 7 minutes and OT, were incredible.
Doing nothing isn't bad especially when the running game is working. Do you want to blame Brock for the traffic this morning too?
We're both painting a picture; selectively choosing the starting point - I'm just using a much bigger canvas. You're choosing a smaller sample size which allows his abysmal start to depress his numbers. I contend he was very good on the team's final 8 drives - a much larger sample size - during which there is no stretch as bad as his first 8 passing attempts. Oh, and they scored 26 points. But that's how it's *supposed* to happen; this offense is built around the run setting up the pass. No coincidence that once Miller got going, so, too, did Osweiler. He completed his next four passes and then drew the key PI to set them up at the goal line (an important play that doesn't go on his - or Hopkins' - stat line but was nonetheless crucial). If the standard is great, or even good... no, he was neither early. But he got better (10/16 for 88 yards and an INT after the 2/8 start but before the 4Q comeback) and led them to two scoring drives. If you want to be encouraged or optimistic, there ya go. After a truly abysmal start, he was, overall, very good for the final 2.5 Qs + OT.
Lol hey now...youre basically allowing his 4th and OT numbers to make his earlier numbers look good. Youre doing it backwards. Just look at his numbers during the first 3 quarters... There is no reason to backtrack from OT to the 2nd quarter bc his numbers at the end of the game are so incredible that it makes up for his bad first 3 quarters. Just look at the numbers as the game progressed. From quarter 1 onward... Not from OT, moving backward. The numbers from quarter 1 thru quarter 3 is all you need to look at. His 4th and OT give Brock a decent game overall, but only bc his 4th and OT were so damn good.
And I said as much; it's arbitrary although not necessarily random - I incorporated their final 8 drives, beginning with the first scoring drive because that's when the offense first showed a pulse. Actually... I'm following the natural progression of the game through its conclusion; granted, from a favorable starting point - but it's the point in which he/they began to play better. You, OTOH, are starting from a favorable *end* point (the moment before he elevated his game) and working backwards. Some of this is simply perspective; some of it is simply bias - both ways. You want to extrapolate bad Brock; I want to extrapolate good Brock. Looking at just the 2 & 3Qs, he was 10/17; 85 yards (5 YPA); 1 INT + the PI call (which led to a TD). The team scored twice. You extend that over a full 4Qs and it's 20/34; 170; 0/1; 20 points. Wherever this ends up, I think we can agree that, while not great, those numbers are better than 2/8; 14 yards (1.8 YPA). We can fight whether they're abysmal - but, again, this is where I think my perspective lends those numbers greater context because it shows him getting progressively better as the game wears on. His first 8 passes were abysmal; his next 17 were better; his final 14 were terrific. Are those final 14 terrific without that middle improvement? He doesn't strike me as a guy who can turn it on and off.
Mallet and Hoyer had years to learn the system and they were awful so I'm giving Brock more than a few months. In the meantime if we can get the running game going it buys Brock and the passing offense time.
Well, yeah, thats the whole point...he started out poorly...then he had a time, in the game, that he turned it on and went nuts. My initial commentary was that he was bad for the first 3 quarters of the game. During that time, he had one drive that led to a TD. Thru 3 quarters. That's not something I made up. Did that drive in the 3rd help him do better in the 4th? Maybe...but the start of his game, as a whole, was not good. Well, yeah, even when you extrapolate those numbers...that's an 81.25 rating over the course of the game...and only 20 points....against one of the bottom 3 defenses in football. And competition does matter. If you want to break it up within 3 segments, fine. First quarter is abysmal. Second and Third quarter are far below average. (82 rating for the season would put him 31st in the NFL) 4th Quarter and OT were elite. Given my expectations of Brock, and the fact that we were playing at home, against one of the worst defenses in football, I find his 1-3 quarters as a failure. The only saving grace of the game is that he went off and saved the game...and that gives me some hope. In any case, lets just hope he can build off that and get some consistency going. I also put much of the blame on the coaches, as I think they are really struggling.
Hoyer spent two years as a backup in new England a long time ago but Fitzpatrick did not. They both put up 90 qbrating their first year here These are just excuses for bad play
Fitz is a Harvard grad. He picks up stuff faster than most. Brock has been really bad, but he's still not a full season in as a starter in his career. He needs to show improvement within the next couple weeks though.
Being 4-2 means we can go through the Growing Pains of Brock . . . .I think we can win this next game BO'B just gotta coach the team up Rocket River
Did you see how fast he learned how to throw 6 picks in a game and get his team to 1-5? What a genius.
And they have this weird idea that they are stars and that they should be paid more and be guaranteed starters
