PBF81

Yeah, but come on. The Pats have averaged 60 yards rushing the past three weeks, they're almost there now.

8 carries for 41 yards rushing. Mostly UTM/OT. 52 minutes more for them to rack up another couple hundred. SMH

But, nothing to do with coaching from the top. NAHHH!

Well, I'm saying that he's only played one big game this season, yesterday, and has only played against two defenses that weren't bottom dwelling catfish. In the two games that he has played as such, he's 47 of 71, for 455 yards, 1 TD, 3 INTs. In the NFL that's a rating of 71.0. It's one thing to not put up a Heisman performance, it's another to do that. Here's the thing, you've mentioned how good he was last season, but that he has no talent around him. But only four USC players were drafted, all four on different units, 2 O and 2 D. His best RB last season isn't on an NFL team and the guy that's replaced him at USC appears to be notably better, and if I had to guess, headed to the draft after his senior season next year if not after his junior season this year. So why is this team so drastically different than last season's? I see no reason why it should be. If several players that weren't drafted left as seniors, that's not typically a big problem for schools given the massive backfills they have for non-stellar players. So why is USC worse this season? It's not from a significant loss of talent. The only OL they lost was drafted in the 7th round. Addison's the only player. Good QBs don't fold in college due to the loss of a single WR, no matter how good. He's got three more big games to step up in. Cal won't be a big game, but Washington, @ Oregon, and UCLA should all be big games. It seems like a longshot that they make the PAC-10 CG though. OK, but having said that, he had a key fumble that like cost his team a TD, had several dicey throws, and got lots of help from his special teams and even D late in the game in not losing by 20. I watched the entire 2nd half and part of the first. I saw it. He wasn't playing well. Not poorly, but far from a great game on his own merits, having nothing to do with the rest of the team. It didn't even approach rising to Heisman levels. Maybe he either overachieved last season or just got lucky last year, who knows. But lighting up Colorado, San Jose State, and Nevada, three teams with defenses ranked 127th, 109th, and 120th, to the tune of 18 TDs and 1 INT, while putting up 8 TDs and 3 INTs in five other games, an average of 1.6 TDs/game, two of which were also against crap Ds, 2 TDs and 3 INTs in the three games that weren't against crap Ds otherwise, and for not even 1 TD/game, hardly screams out Heisman much less that he should be the first overall draft pick. Not as I evaluate anyway. Let's see how he finishes. Come on though, he got lots of help from his special teams and D. Of those 32 points, 6 were that Pick-6. fAlready down to 26. SC's first TD was Lloyd's 45-yard TD run. Down to 19. Williams was 2 for 2 for 6 yards on that drive. His only contribution was a 13-yard run. He's not going to be great in the NFL because of his running. So we can take those 7 off too. Now we're down to 19, which is far from impressive. He had one and only one notable play on their second scoring drive, but Washington also deserves equal credit for that. Washington also deserves credit, alongside Williams, for getting wide open on the only other notable pass play by Williams for 40 yards. Two FGs otherwise, and that 61-yard PR set-up Williams' 13-yard TD run. I see two big pass plays in that game, that's it, as the primary reason for 13 points. That's it. I see a defense that put up 6, a PR that set up another 6, and Lloyd who ran for a 45-yard TD as the primary reason for 19 of their 32 points. IDK why not. Their team hasn't changed that much. But Washington and Lloyd did a pretty good job yesterday. No? The D put up 6 directly, and the STs provided a 61-yard PR to set-up Williams' 13-yard run. Meanwhile, on a play that could have won the game, Williams gets sacked on 3rd-and-8 to force a FG instead of going up by 1 or possibly 3 late in the 4th. That wasn't a Heisman play. But why isn't he doing better this season? They lost almost no one, by collegiate standards, in the draft. It appears to be nearly the same team. I'm having difficulty reconciling that. No one is. Burrow was about as sure a thing as I've ever seen. I would put Lawrence in there too. Also, keep in mind, that it's quite possible that he was overrated from last season. Again, he's got four games left, at least, and three of 'em are big games. Let's see how he finishes. But as of now, if I'm a GM looking for a QB, I'm incredibly hesitant to use a top-5 pick, possibly top-10, on Williams, based upon his play this season. I would consider last season more of a fluke, pending his play in November. Heisman's don't mean much to me in this regard. In fact, it's funny we're talking about this, but the other criteria that would make me avoid a QB drafted highly, is in fact winning a Heisman. There's a lot of irony there. The track record of Heisman winning QBs in the NFL is not inspiring. LOL You have to go back to Carson Palmer over 20 years ago, ironically from USC, to find a Heisman winning QB that even sniffed greatness in the NFL prior to Burrow, and discounting Bryce Young for now, whom I'm not betting on to join Burrow in bucking that. Here's a list of the modern Heisman-winning QBs since Palmer: Murray, Mayfield, Jackson, Mariota, Winston, Manziel, RG III, Newton, Bradford, Tebow, Troy Smith, Leinart, and Jason White. The list through the 90s is even worse. Murray, Jackson, and maybe Mayfield are solid starters, but hardly great. Over half aren't even in the league anymore I don't think. Several just sucked outright. Either way, the only way that I give Williams a percentage of ownership is if it's aligned with his contract from a percentage perspective, and 80% of it goes into an escrow to be paid back if he doesn't ante-up. LOL

It seemed like a bad SNL skit. Maybe it'll be great. I'll read about it here no doubt.

Well, as pointed out, the average score of the last four games is 35-18 us, and this Pats team is worse than any of those teams. Be that as it may, he hasn't stepped up on any of his biggest games. It's safe to say that QBs with less talent around them, are playing better than that against comparable teams. The message appears to be, listen to what people say, despite the fact that he simply hasn't stepped up in the couple of big games he's played. Not even average. My methodology includes having more/ample proof before drawing conclusions.

Yup The next four games and possible CC are going to heavily impact his draft status, ... IMO. One thing's for sure, he looks like a prima donna asking for ownership at this stage of things. GO BILLS!!!! Let's hope that our offense pulls its head out of its a$$ tomorrow. G' night!!

Williams has plenty of opportunity this season to prove himself against top competition. USC faces three of four ranked conference opponents forthcoming. Cal sucks, but after that, Washington (currently 5th), @ Oregon (currently 9th), and then UCLA (currently 25th), then a possible conference championship game. And FWIW, Barnes, a backup, has significantly outplayed Williams in this game. Passing and running.

The punter trying to get within tackling range ... LOL

It is? I thought it was to bicker and argue and hurl ad hominems and fight over who was right. LOL Sometimes ya can't tell. I appreciate the great back-n-forth though!!! Why am I growing more concerned about our game tomorrow. By all rights this should be a 20+ point blowout. All of a sudden I'm having an anxiety attack.

That debacle was on Williams. Say what you want about USC, but this is the second ranked team that they've played, the other having been Notre Dame where Williams was abysmal. This game and particularly the finish ain't doing him any favors. This is their toughest game of the season. LOL, that's a bit of a reach as well. But for the reasons I've expressed above, I wouldn't expend a top-10 draft pick, likely not top-15 on him.

OK, makes sense, very conventionally, but it makes sense. I tend to go beyond conventional in my approach, which is perhaps why the results are typically better than what most draft analysts yield. We all have our methods. I will say, you're up-playing Williams' age, but he's only one year younger than Burrow was when Burrow put up his 60 TD 6 INT season. Burrow also did it with only one prior year of starting. This is Williams' third season of starting. Burrow also lit up some insanely great defensive competition. Williams has yet to do that this season. Not trying to mix it up with you, but I'd put those things up against the things that you mention first, not second. LIke I said, we all have our methodologies. Ours definitely differ with yours being more conventional. Anyway, Williams has a great opportunity to shine right now, 8:24 remaining, down by 8, at home, against defenses that aren't as good as the top ones that Burrow faced while at LSU and in the SEC, a much tougher defensive conference. Let's see what happens.

You said a lot here. I wouldn't say that I don't like him. I would say that I simply don't trust his circumstances after several decades of watching and evaluating PAC-10 QBs in transition to the NFL, measured against their expectations going into the Draft. IMO the USC ones have done worse than the collective average. I haven't poured a ton of resources into gathering that info though. LOL I lean on the info I cited up top. Who knows, maybe he'll be the next Mahomes. I wouldn't bet much on the notion that he'll ever be better than average. But then again, the general odds favor that so that's not really a bold prediction or anything. Not quite sure what you mean in that second sentence. But as to Allen in general, I've mentioned it before, but of all, as in every, QB in his draft, Allen had the worst track record against power-5 competition of all of them. Allen came into the NFL either without having read defenses well. I still don't think it's his forte`, but he's absolutely improved by miles on it. But he's the first QB that I'm aware of that has come into the NFL with that handicap, and overcome it to the extent that he has. Ever. IMO it's his intelligence, nothing else, that has allowed it to occur. He's had positive influences and the like, but it's his smarts that got him to this point. It was an uphill battle for him as it was. He didn't have to do that at Wyoming, he was a man among boys there. But that's also why he sucked vs. the few power-5 teams he played. Again, worse than any other QB in his draft. It's remarkable how he's transformed himself. As of now, today, well, we beat each other up enough in the forum over the perceived reasons there. LOL You know the arguments. I place little on Allen, or the receivers for that matter. You know where I place the lion's share of the blame there. I honestly don't know much about Burrow until his Senior season at LSU, like everyone else. My take after watching him that season and in the NCG was that he's for sure going to be great in the NFL. The only other QB I've thought that about in recent years is Lawrence. I rarely think that about a QB going in. He was as poised as they make 'em, and that was against a brutal defense in the biggest of games. As to Meyer, could be Meyer. But he's an "expert" as we like to call them here, right? Some, many "experts" even, simply aren't very good "experts," whether they're GMs, HCs, coordinators, etc. Simply because someone's in a role doesn't mean that they're average or above-average, much less excel at it. They're all "experts" and know more than anyone that isn't, ... until they're not. LOL And on that note, in a related context, it's interesting how when Saban had the NFL equivalent of 10 picks in the 1st-round in the NFL with his recruiting advantage, how great he and Alabama were. But the moment that that edge disipated, so did "how good he is." He's hardly at a disadvantge now, but the playing field's been leveled out quite a bit. Quite possible. I haven't analyzed it so I cannot comment intelligently on that. Nor does it interest me all that much. I will say, in light of our discussion, it's now 28-17 Utah with 1 Q remaining. Williams hasn't had all that great a game. 200 yards, 0 TDs. So let's see how he plays in this last Q, the type of environment he'll be facing in the NFL next year. Who knows, maybe he'll pitch for 150 and 2 TDs in the 4th Q. Let's see. Watching now ... Looks like it's going to come down to Williams' play.

OK, but at the same time I'm not going to ignore his performances against talent that's heading to the NFL. I don't know enough about USC to comment, but a quick glance reveals that they're 8th in the nation running the ball, Rushing Yards per Game, and that's not all that much because of Williams. So their O can't be that bad. Either way, like I said, everyone has their methods, you know what mine is. I realize that it's unique, but it's outperformed the others over the years. I'm quite content with it. I'm not trying to change anyone's mind about theirs. He'll likely be the first QB off the board, without ownership, LOL, so I'm sure we'll be seeing how he's doing by this time next season. Maybe on NE.

Yeah, I realize that. Of everything currently known, to me the most important thing is how he plays against talent that's likely to make it to the NFL. That's pretty much my standard for most players. Tonight he's playing the Utes with the 5th ranked D, and he's not exactly lighting them up either. Everyone has their methods, that's mine. It's been pretty proven for me over the years.

No, of course it doesn't mean that a QB that goes to USC can't be really good, but besides Palmer none have been. And he was never premier. Maybe a couple of high end seasons, but otherwise not. I've not watched Williams, so I'm shooting from the hip here. My comments were general in nature, as you noticed. But I will say this, he's diminutive for a QB, listed at 6'1"/218 But here's the thing, of the five schools that that's beaten up on with gawdy stats, the best ranked D was ASU, at 90th. Other than that, the other four teams all rank 115th or worse, out of 133. So essentially among the bottom 10%. Against Arizona with the 39th ranked D he was good in passing, but not great. Against 11th ranked Notre Dame he was terrible. Against teams ranked better than 90th in D, only two, he's 37 of 62, 418, 2 TDs, 3 INTs. That's good for a 70.5 passer rating in the NFL. In short, it's nice that he can beat up on Colorado, Nevada, and San Jose St., but those aren't the caliber of players he'll be seeing in the NFL. I still wouldn't draft him. But that's me. I'm a horse of a different color. LOL I do think that those are the things that GMs need to look at however upon conducting their drafts. This ownership crap merely makes me feel good about my decision.

No, but given the affiliation, presumably the data's coming from the NFL. It's not so much the data, it's what people do with it.

I hear ya, but there's an enomous difference between USC and Wyoming, not really apples to apples there. USC's a power-5 school, Wyoming on the opposite end. No one's going to draft a Wyoming QB in the first 10 picks again, likely ever. I could have added more detail though, a bunch QBs were highly rated as draft prospects, that came from USC. Leinart, Marinovich, Palmer, Darnold. Not one, that I'm aware of, has ever gone on to do much in the NFL besides Palmer, who was very good but hardly great. As well, as you implied, I'm referring to the modern era, say the era of free-agency. I discount the PAC-10 because they're ranked way below the other four power-5 conferences in terms of defense, perennially. At least QBs in the SEC, Big-12, ACC, and Big Ten have faced defenses that are among the best in the NCAA on a regular basis. IMO that's important in evaluating a QB. Again, I'd avoid it if I were a GM. I'd rather take a bottom 1st-rounder pick for a QB on a team from one of the other four power-5 conference teams.

Bleu, or ranch?

I wouldn't draft a USC QB ever. They wouldn't even be on the first 20 picks of my 1st-round board, ever. Their QB production history given the matching hype is abysmal. The PAC-10 is a defensively bereft conference that makes QBs coming out of it rate much better than most are. Let other sucker teams draft them. Agree. You can extrapolate that to the historically high rated USC QBs as well.

Great stuff Einstein!!! Great thread prompting some great substantive discussion and posts!! Only. LOL Site looks robust as well. Was there anything further, like 2nd-reads and their targets, and 3rd-and-others kinda thing, or just first? I don't know to what extent teams track that stuff. It'd be an interesting view to see how it relates to the controversial discussions we've been having about Davis. i.e., Davis' 1st-read target rank, and thinking relative to other #2s. My initial thoughts on your post and the comments heretofore, are that Allen/Diggs/Davis are performing well. AKA the execution is there seemingly. So open question then; wouldn't the notion that we're executing, and given the backdrop of our two-game offensive woes, seem to indicate then that it is in fact the play-calling/design that's in question as to the primary reason for the low offensive outputs? (Semi-rhetorical) IDK, just throwing that out there. Most of us have our hunches and educated reasons for why we think or conversely do not think that. This is one of the best threads ever so far. BTW, there's also an excellent similar type of article re: the D linked on the front page, by Ryan O'Halloran. He puts together some nice stats as well that touch upon the issues with our rushing D. It sheds some light on some things, like that this D is likely made for and focuses on a hectic pass-rush, but, and not by design seemingly, at the expense of the rushing D.

Sounds like the "new Allen," we should know more in another 6 games or so. I would imagine that he's still not at steady-state yet. He's quite likely still figuring a lot of this out on his own. https://data.fantasypoints.com/

There's a good Ryan O'Halloran article about the D linked on today's front page. It adds some great info that supports this as well.

The last four games we've played them in, we've beaten them by an average score of 35-18. If we can't win this game by 10+ points after the two stinkers that we've played in the past two weeks, then there's more wrong than we realize. This might be the weakest Pats team since before Brady.

You're in a good mood. LOL