Mike B. in VA Posted December 12, 2013 Posted December 12, 2013 http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/64557588/ I generally agree with what Tanier has to say here. Thoughts?
wnysteel Posted December 12, 2013 Posted December 12, 2013 best paragraph was in the summary: The good news is that Manuel looks poised and generally makes good decisions, despite the fact that he barely played in the preseason and missed part of the year with injuries. Accuracy can be hard to improve, but when coaches can focus on it (instead of explaining Page 3 of the playbook), there's a chance of gaining huge dividends from a tiny mechanical correction.
PearlHowardman Posted December 12, 2013 Posted December 12, 2013 "The Bad: Throws behind receivers over the middle. Throws ahead of or over the heads of receivers near the sidelines. The poor short accuracy does not seem to come from any mechanical flaw: Manuel just misfires. Lacks touch on deep passes: Overthrowing Goodwin (as Manuel often does) takes some work. "Takes a lot of "fast guy" sacks: waits too long to throw, hopes his legs will bail him out, and gets surprised when NFL defenders run him down. Trusts his elusiveness too much and will attempt ill-advised superhero spin moves in the pocket, turning six-yard sacks into nine-yarders. Has suffered several injuries this season and must be wary of taking too many hits."
thebandit27 Posted December 12, 2013 Posted December 12, 2013 "The Bad: Throws behind receivers over the middle. Throws ahead of or over the heads of receivers near the sidelines. The poor short accuracy does not seem to come from any mechanical flaw: Manuel just misfires. Lacks touch on deep passes: Overthrowing Goodwin (as Manuel often does) takes some work. "Takes a lot of "fast guy" sacks: waits too long to throw, hopes his legs will bail him out, and gets surprised when NFL defenders run him down. Trusts his elusiveness too much and will attempt ill-advised superhero spin moves in the pocket, turning six-yard sacks into nine-yarders. Has suffered several injuries this season and must be wary of taking too many hits." Clearly that was the most important part of the article
PearlHowardman Posted December 12, 2013 Posted December 12, 2013 Clearly that was the most important part of the article Manuel. Just. Misfires.
thebandit27 Posted December 12, 2013 Posted December 12, 2013 Manuel. Just. Misfires. Thanks for adding that brilliant insight...
Webster Guy Posted December 12, 2013 Posted December 12, 2013 (edited) I disagree with his "ill-advised" superhero spin moves assessment. EJ's spin/rollout move to the left can be awesome and works more than it fails. It allows him to escape, see the pressure and roll out all in the same move, and he doesn't over-use it in my opinion. Here's my take: EJ has EVERYTHING but the touch right now. And that's saying a lot for a rookie. I think if he throws 10,000 more practice balls to his primary receivers and has a great offseason then by the end of next season we will know what we have. Giving a promising rookie two full years is logical in EJ's case because he will do the work. Stevie might not, but Woods will and I think Goodwin will too. Draft a stud TE and a left guard and get this kid a full NFL offseason for development. Then I think it's a 50/50 chance he will be a good NFL qb. Don't forget we were in a lot of close games this year, if he were 20% better we would have won. I trust EJ for some reason. But lets keep Thad Lewis around. As the old Arabic proverb says: "Trust in God....but first....tether your camel...." Edited December 12, 2013 by Webster Guy
Campy Posted December 12, 2013 Posted December 12, 2013 "The Bad: Throws behind receivers over the middle. Throws ahead of or over the heads of receivers near the sidelines. The poor short accuracy does not seem to come from any mechanical flaw: Manuel just misfires. Lacks touch on deep passes: Overthrowing Goodwin (as Manuel often does) takes some work. "Takes a lot of "fast guy" sacks: waits too long to throw, hopes his legs will bail him out, and gets surprised when NFL defenders run him down. Trusts his elusiveness too much and will attempt ill-advised superhero spin moves in the pocket, turning six-yard sacks into nine-yarders. Has suffered several injuries this season and must be wary of taking too many hits." If we're putting any stock in what Tanner has to say, read the write up on Geno's "The Bad" and feel 1,000 times better about the Bills' QB.
The Big Cat Posted December 12, 2013 Posted December 12, 2013 I disagree with his "ill-advised" superhero spin moves assessment. EJ's spin/rollout move to the left can be awesome and works more than it fails. It allows him to escape, see the pressure and roll out all in the same move, and he doesn't over-use it in my opinion. Here's my take: EJ has EVERYTHING but the touch right now. And that's saying a lot for a rookie. I think if he throws 10,000 more practice balls to his primary receivers and has a great offseason then by the end of next season we will know what we have. Giving a promising rookie two full years is logical in EJ's case because he will do the work. Stevie might not, but Woods will and I think Goodwin will too. Draft a stud TE and a left guard and get this kid a full NFL offseason for development. Then I think it's a 50/50 chance he will be a good NFL qb. Don't forget we were in a lot of close games this year, if he were 20% better we would have won. I trust EJ for some reason. But lets keep Thad Lewis around. As the old Arabic proverb says: "Trust in God....but first....tether your camel...." He's missing more than touch, sorry. His timing is terrible. He needs to throw receivers open, trust the routes, trust his arm, rock and fire.
PearlHowardman Posted December 12, 2013 Posted December 12, 2013 Thanks for adding that brilliant insight... I didn't add it. I quoted it from the article.
Dibs Posted December 12, 2013 Posted December 12, 2013 (edited) I had to look at the date the article of when the article was written. I figure this article must have been held back for a week as the comment of..... "...and while Smith and Glennon had decent games on Sunday..." ......is incongruous with Glennon's 9-25-90-2-2 performance against Buffalo. It's the little things like this early in an article that leave me disinterested in the rest. Edited December 12, 2013 by Dibs
thebandit27 Posted December 12, 2013 Posted December 12, 2013 I didn't add it. I quoted it from the article. No, a quote would read "Manuel just misfires"; you had to go all new-age-supercool and ad the periods, which I can only assume is to add emphasis that the author didn't intend to include.
ny33 Posted December 13, 2013 Posted December 13, 2013 http://www.sportsone...ticle/64557588/ I generally agree with what Tanier has to say here. Thoughts? Glennon did not have a "decent game" Sunday.
Recommended Posts