Footballbyfootball.com

[YoloinOhio]

If you ever get weary of some of the sports media who has never played or coached football trying to analyze what is happening with a team or player yet appearing not to know what they are talking about, this website is pretty cool

 

 

http://www.footballbyfootball.com

About the site:

"Experience counts immensely—especially in analyzing the world’s most complex sport. A tiny percentage of the writing population has football experience. This is a disparity we aim to change.

Football fans crave insight. So, when the world orders a steak, you don’t butcher a chicken."

 

The former players who contribute so far I have seen/heard in the media elsewhere and they are intelligent and balanced, not just trying to provide "hot takes" so people will click on their tweets or know their names.

 

Just thought some might like to check it out!

Edited September 4, 2014 by YoloinOhio

[Wayne Cubed]

Wow, it's a great site.

 

I enjoyed reading Brady Quinn's article on starting rookie QB's. Interesting that he says that a Hall of Fame coach says you should give a QB 3 years to determine if they can play or not. Don't think some fans in Buffalo can wait that long.

[Harveyj001]

I keep telling my friends that area ready to throw EJ away that all I have ever heard is you have to wait 30 games to judge a QB, he may not be the answer but he had good and bad games last year. That is expected for a rookie, all I want is progress this year, if there is some of that and a couple of bounces that go our way the playoffs are a possibility.

[Mr. WEO]

Well....the first article on the page is about why/when you should start a rookie QB......basically, he cites the need for a uncommonly stellar defense (they mention Seattle and Wilson then Baltimore and Flacco), a great running game and top notch special teams--they dub this their "concoction of rookie QB success" (I kid you not).

 

Then, the purpose of this set up is to explain why....the Raiders should therefore start Carr!

 

For the "top-tier" defense required to safely start a rookie QB, they mention "aquisitions of Justin Tuck, LAmar Woodley and the underrated Antonio Smith". Then they mention "sack machine" Khalil Mack and the ancient Charles Woodson. Then he says this group "sounds like the right recipe thus far".

 

As for running game, they talk about MJD and McFadden as (groan) "Thunder and Lightning" which will allow for "big plays in the running game".

 

Nuggets of football player only wisdom like this follow:

 

"in order for Oakland’s stout defense to be effective, they must rely on their special teams play to at least be even in yardage with their opponent. Ideally, they’d give them a dynamic play from time to time. If they’re able to accomplish this, Oakland can keep momentum on their side and give Derek Carr a chance to make some plays and win them games."

 

Whoa.....Mind=blown!

 

I'm sorry, but this doesn't offer anything more than superficial analysis and seems to have been written by a college newspaper columnist.

 

Oh, the author?....Brady Quinn!!

 

For an extra treat check out the next article--an open letter to Johnny Manziel...from Sage Rosenfels! Unintentionally hilarious.

 

Thanks Yolo! This site will be a treat to read.

Edited September 4, 2014 by Mr. WEO

[JohnC]

Well....the first article on the page is about why/when you should start a rookie QB......basically, he cites the need for a uncommonly stellar defense (they mention Seattle and Wilson then Baltimore and Flacco), a great running game and top notch special teams--they dub this their "concoction of rookie QB success" (I kid you not).

 

Then, the purpose of this set up is to explain why....the Raiders should therefore start Carr!

 

For the "top-tier" defense required to safely start a rookie QB, they mention "aquisitions of Justin Tuck, LAmar Woodley and the underrated Antonio Smith". Then they mention "sack machine" Khalil Mack and the ancient Charles Woodson. Then he says this group "sounds like the right recipe thus far".

 

As for running game, they talk about MJD and McFadden as (groan) "Thunder and Lightning" which will allow for "big plays in the running game".

 

Nuggets of football player only wisdom like this follow:

 

"in order for Oakland’s stout defense to be effective, they must rely on their special teams play to at least be even in yardage with their opponent. Ideally, they’d give them a dynamic play from time to time. If they’re able to accomplish this, Oakland can keep momentum on their side and give Derek Carr a chance to make some plays and win them games."

 

Whoa.....Mind=blown!

 

I'm sorry, but this doesn't offer anything more than superficial analysis and seems to have been written by a college newspaper columnist.

 

Oh, the author?....Brady Quinn!!

 

For an extra treat check out the next article--an open letter to Johnny Manziel...from Sage Rosenfels! Unintentionally hilarious.

 

Thanks Yolo! This site will be a treat to read.

 

WEO, The author is discussing pro football not nuclear theory. Sometimes issues are not as complex as people self-servingly make it out to be. Too often the commentators and self declared analysts put a lot of effort into making an obvious observation into a brilliant discovery. Cliches are the language of football communication because

so much of the game is simply basic. The game in itself is relatively simple; the execution, not brilliant strategies, is what makes the difference.

Edited September 4, 2014 by JohnC

[YoloinOhio]

Well....the first article on the page is about why/when you should start a rookie QB......basically, he cites the need for a uncommonly stellar defense (they mention Seattle and Wilson then Baltimore and Flacco), a great running game and top notch special teams--they dub this their "concoction of rookie QB success" (I kid you not).

 

Then, the purpose of this set up is to explain why....the Raiders should therefore start Carr!

 

For the "top-tier" defense required to safely start a rookie QB, they mention "aquisitions of Justin Tuck, LAmar Woodley and the underrated Antonio Smith". Then they mention "sack machine" Khalil Mack and the ancient Charles Woodson. Then he says this group "sounds like the right recipe thus far".

 

As for running game, they talk about MJD and McFadden as (groan) "Thunder and Lightning" which will allow for "big plays in the running game".

 

Nuggets of football player only wisdom like this follow:

 

"in order for Oakland’s stout defense to be effective, they must rely on their special teams play to at least be even in yardage with their opponent. Ideally, they’d give them a dynamic play from time to time. If they’re able to accomplish this, Oakland can keep momentum on their side and give Derek Carr a chance to make some plays and win them games."

 

Whoa.....Mind=blown!

 

I'm sorry, but this doesn't offer anything more than superficial analysis and seems to have been written by a college newspaper columnist.

 

Oh, the author?....Brady Quinn!!

 

For an extra treat check out the next article--an open letter to Johnny Manziel...from Sage Rosenfels! Unintentionally hilarious.

 

Thanks Yolo! This site will be a treat to read.

glad you enjoyed, WEO.

[JohnC]

glad you enjoyed, WEO.

 

A juandiced eye can still see---only it sees things differently.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Wow, it's a great site.

 

I enjoyed reading Brady Quinn's article on starting rookie QB's. Interesting that he says that a Hall of Fame coach says you should give a QB 3 years to determine if they can play or not. Don't think some fans in Buffalo can wait that long.

 

If you look at Quinn's list:

1. Surround your QB with a top-tier defense that’s stingy in the red zone and can create turnovers. Paging Ray Lewis, Terrell Suggs and Ed Reed. Richard Sherman, Earl Thomas and Michael Bennett do just fine as well.
   
2. Implement a productive rushing attack that can control the clock and grind out the tough yards on 3rd/4th and 1. Ray Rice and Marshawn Lynch. Ding. And ding.
   
3. Build a solid special teams unit with the ability to create an explosive play. Jacoby “Dancing with the Stars” Jones and Percy “Flash” Harvin both scored touchdowns in their respective Super Bowls, showcasing the momentum swing that element can provide.
   

Last year, which of these did B'lo have:

1. Top-tier defense stingy in the red zone? Defensive rank 20th on points - errrrr, that would be "no". Our run D was 28th in the league on rushing yards given up. Bzzzzzt.

2. Productive rushing attack? We were #2 in the league for yards, but #1 in the league for rushing attempts. But our 3rd down conversion was poor and we were only 10th in TDs.

We broke off long runs at times, and we tried a lot, but we didn't use the run very successfully to control the clock or to convert 3rd and 4th downs.

3. ST? We thought so much of our ST many of us were calling for the ST coach's head after last season.

 

Overall, I would have to say we are not giving EJ the tools a young QB needs to succeed. In their defense, I believe Marrone and company have tried to improve all 3, both in LB acquisitions and in RB acquisitions as well as a bit more focus on keeping players for ST. Time will tell if it's enough.

[NewEra]

Well....the first article on the page is about why/when you should start a rookie QB......basically, he cites the need for a uncommonly stellar defense (they mention Seattle and Wilson then Baltimore and Flacco), a great running game and top notch special teams--they dub this their "concoction of rookie QB success" (I kid you not).

 

Then, the purpose of this set up is to explain why....the Raiders should therefore start Carr!

 

For the "top-tier" defense required to safely start a rookie QB, they mention "aquisitions of Justin Tuck, LAmar Woodley and the underrated Antonio Smith". Then they mention "sack machine" Khalil Mack and the ancient Charles Woodson. Then he says this group "sounds like the right recipe thus far".

 

As for running game, they talk about MJD and McFadden as (groan) "Thunder and Lightning" which will allow for "big plays in the running game".

 

Nuggets of football player only wisdom like this follow:

 

"in order for Oakland’s stout defense to be effective, they must rely on their special teams play to at least be even in yardage with their opponent. Ideally, they’d give them a dynamic play from time to time. If they’re able to accomplish this, Oakland can keep momentum on their side and give Derek Carr a chance to make some plays and win them games."

 

Whoa.....Mind=blown!

 

I'm sorry, but this doesn't offer anything more than superficial analysis and seems to have been written by a college newspaper columnist.

 

Oh, the author?....Brady Quinn!!

 

For an extra treat check out the next article--an open letter to Johnny Manziel...from Sage Rosenfels! Unintentionally hilarious.

 

Thanks Yolo! This site will be a treat to read.

 

Lol

[Mr. WEO]

WEO, The author is discussing pro football not nuclear theory. Sometimes issues are not as complex as people self-servingly make it out to be. Too often the commentators and self declared analysts put a lot of effort into making an obvious observation into a brilliant discovery. Cliches are the language of football communication because

so much of the game is simply basic. The game in itself is relatively simple; the execution, not brilliant strategies, is what makes the difference.

 

Come on John! Did you read those two articles? It's all cliche.

 

I thought I was going to get some technical insite I couldn't get at the ususal places. Instead I got Brady Quinn telling us that a young QB needs a historically good D, a top running game and the best ST that cna be had.

 

You didn't already know this? And the fact that he cites the Raiders, of all teams!, as an example of an organization that has all of these elements right now is just silly. That team is a mess.

 

glad you enjoyed, WEO.

 

Sorry, man! But you promised "intelligent balanced analysis". There is none of that in the first 2 articles (although I did learn that JM should not do the "money finger rub" after he throws 4 TDs...).

[YoloinOhio]

Come on John! Did you read those two articles? It's all cliche.

 

I thought I was going to get some technical insite I couldn't get at the ususal places. Instead I got Brady Quinn telling us that a young QB needs a historically good D, a top running game and the best ST that cna be had.

 

You didn't already know this? And the fact that he cites the Raiders, of all teams!, as an example of an organization that has all of these elements right now is just silly. That team is a mess.

 

 

 

Sorry, man! But you promised "intelligent balanced analysis". There is none of that in the first 2 articles (although I did learn that JM should not do the "money finger rub" after he throws 4 TDs...).

To each his or her own, I suppose!

[Mr. WEO]

To each his or her own, I suppose!

 

It's cool. I definitely will be checking out the site in the future!

[chris heff]

So is this site articles written only by players or ex-players? Or will they include coaches, scouts, etc?

[YoloinOhio]

So is this site articles written only by players or ex-players? Or will they include coaches, scouts, etc?

Not sure - I think it just launched

[JohnC]

 

 

Come on John! Did you read those two articles? It's all cliche.

 

I thought I was going to get some technical insite I couldn't get at the ususal places. Instead I got Brady Quinn telling us that a young QB needs a historically good D, a top running game and the best ST that cna be had.

 

WEO, I didn't bother to read the article because what you posted about the article told me more than enough that I needed to know about the substance of the article.

 

You are searching for insight? What insight are you seeking? Keep searching for the illuminating thought that doesn't exist. When you find it I hope you will be kind of enough to point it out to me. 95% of the material written and spoken about the NFL by its so called experts is a rehash of the rehash. As I said in the first post cliches are simply the language of football commentators.

 

My original point is that there is no football concept or analysis that is novel. It's not like theoritical physics or cosmic astronomy that is incomprehensible to most people. There is nothing about the game that is difficult to comprehend. Don't over-think the obvious. It simply comes down to talent and execution.

 

 

[drinkTHEkoolaid]

Actually many times I think the smartest football opinions. ...are from the numbers geeks who analyze and think outside the box and dont just use the traditional football mentality of this is the way it should be. Like numbers geeks saying its dumb to punt on 4th and 2. I like the logic behind that and they explain it in a way that makes sense.

 

If I want a perspective into locker room dynamics or shower habits than a player's perspective would be helpful.

Edited September 4, 2014 by drinkTHEkoolaid

[chris heff]

I think sometimes you will get information at this site that is insightful and other times it will be full of cliches. Everyone associated with football isn't insightful, nor are they all trite. You could probably make that statement about everything. I like the concept of the site, thanks for sharing it.