Bills tied for 2nd most "deep" throws in the NFL...

[Big Turk]

2 hours ago, TaskersGhost said:

This is interesting and as long as it’s been posted it’s a good time to consider the implications. 

 

Here’s the takeaway from that data tidbit …

 

This is data from just over half a season.  Let’s take a team with a good QB from that lot, say Rodgers & GB. 

 

Rodgers has still only completed 38% of those deep throws, which clearly means the obvious, that while the NFL average completion rate is in the 60’s for percentage, the deep-throw completion percentage is just over half of that.   And yes, these numbers are on par with league averages for a season.  

 

In fact, Rodgers has completed 18 of those 48 throws assuming that the data is accurage.  That’s 2 deep-throw completions per game, and let’s not forget that “deep” means simply throws of 20+ yards whereas I don’t particularly consider throws of under 40 requiring Marino (or Allen) arm-strength.  I can’t imagine who would since there are many NFL QBs not noted for arm-strength that can and who have traditionally made such throws with comparable frequency. 

 

Either way, that’s on a good team with good receivers, no particular running game to balance off of rendering their passing game all the more critical to effective functioning, which it clearly is with Rodgers at the helm. 

 

So in this child-like kid-in-a-candy-shop tendency to overrate arm-strength, which has failed so often in the recent past (Russell, Leaf, Locker, et al.), why would anyone opt to build a team around deep-throws as McBeane have done? 

 

According to that data, with the average number of plays-from-scrimmage being run in the mid-high 60s, and with an average of approx. 5 deep-throw attempts, again, “deep” being defined by a mere 20 yards, hardly requiring iconic arm-strength, this is easily fewer than 10% of plays, the vast majority of which fail. 

 

It is around 3% that succeed, again, 20+, not 40 or 50+, but even so. 

 

Wouldn’t it make far more sense to look for a QB that is far more capable of managing the other 90-some% of the game well. 

 

Just sayin’ as if, and since, it isn’t obvious to many, including so-called “experts” that make a more than handsome living in this business. 

 

As a sidenote, also not going unnoticed is that only 3 of those 10 teams have winning records. 

Its kind of like Steven Seagal in Marked For Death...

 

The anticipation of death is worse than death itself.

 

The anticipation of the deep throw is worse than the deep throw itself but that in turn opens up the underneath stuff. If you have a QB who you KNEW couldnt throw it over the top you wouldn't have to respect it and they would just compress the short routes to the point those would no longer be relatively easy completions.

2 hours ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

It's been a season long trend since Allen became the starting QB that was continued by Anderson and Barkley. 

 

Barkley at least completed his tho...

Edited November 15, 2018 by matter2003

[HomeskillitMoorman]

I bet we're #1 in throwing those deep balls out of bounds. 

[JMF2006]

I bet we are last in PI's called on those throws.

6 minutes ago, HomeskillitMoorman said:

I bet we're #1 in throwing those deep balls out of bounds. 

 

 

That too. 

[buffalobillswin]

When Josh overthrows a 8 yard route by 12 yards, does that count as a deep throw?

 

[LABILLBACKER]

3 hours ago, Soda Popinski said:

That 45% by the Chiefs is impressive.  

A deep ball to KC is throw a 5 yrd pass to Hill in the flat and watch him go 70 yds....

[Big Turk]

12 minutes ago, LABILLBACKER said:

A deep ball to KC is throw a 5 yrd pass to Hill in the flat and watch him go 70 yds....

Or you know, like a 67 yard pass in the air where the safeties stopped covering Hill because they didnt think Mahomes could throw it that far and then it hits Hill perfectly in stride for a TD...

[RoyBatty is alive]

Considering how few offense snaps we have had this year being tied for #2 is really impressive.

[sleeby]

There's a hidden stat there which I know exists but do not know what it looks like; a veritable black hole.  Many long throws which are not completed increase the number of chances for penalties against the D.  Small ones like holding at the line that make a third and long into a first down and of course the holy grail of defensive pass interference on a 40 yard throw.

[wagon127]

Does this include passes that are thrown out of bounds? Cause if it does, it makes perfect sense.

[WideNine]

6 hours ago, TaskersGhost said:

This is interesting and as long as it’s been posted it’s a good time to consider the implications. 

 

Here’s the takeaway from that data tidbit …

 

This is data from just over half a season.  Let’s take a team with a good QB from that lot, say Rodgers & GB. 

 

Rodgers has still only completed 38% of those deep throws, which clearly means the obvious, that while the NFL average completion rate is in the 60’s for percentage, the deep-throw completion percentage is just over half of that.   And yes, these numbers are on par with league averages for a season.  

 

In fact, Rodgers has completed 18 of those 48 throws assuming that the data is accurage.  That’s 2 deep-throw completions per game, and let’s not forget that “deep” means simply throws of 20+ yards whereas I don’t particularly consider throws of under 40 requiring Marino (or Allen) arm-strength.  I can’t imagine who would since there are many NFL QBs not noted for arm-strength that can and who have traditionally made such throws with comparable frequency. 

 

Either way, that’s on a good team with good receivers, no particular running game to balance off of rendering their passing game all the more critical to effective functioning, which it clearly is with Rodgers at the helm. 

 

So in this child-like kid-in-a-candy-shop tendency to overrate arm-strength, which has failed so often in the recent past (Russell, Leaf, Locker, et al.), why would anyone opt to build a team around deep-throws as McBeane have done? 

 

According to that data, with the average number of plays-from-scrimmage being run in the mid-high 60s, and with an average of approx. 5 deep-throw attempts, again, “deep” being defined by a mere 20 yards, hardly requiring iconic arm-strength, this is easily fewer than 10% of plays, the vast majority of which fail. 

 

It is around 3% that succeed, again, 20+, not 40 or 50+, but even so. 

 

Wouldn’t it make far more sense to look for a QB that is far more capable of managing the other 90-some% of the game well. 

 

Just sayin’ as if, and since, it isn’t obvious to many, including so-called “experts” that make a more than handsome living in this business. 

 

As a sidenote, also not going unnoticed is that only 3 of those 10 teams have winning records. 

 

I want to argue against this, but I do think that a QB that can hit all the shorter throws can find success in the league.

 

It is a bit deceiving because having a legit deep ball threat (emphasis on threat) can change how defenses play you. They can be less willing to play man and load the box against the run or short underneath routes. The NFL has tweaked the rules so that there is often a good chance you will get a DPI with or without a completion.

 

Not sure if it is something that does not have value if a team has the tools to pull it off enough and teams have to respect and defend against it.

[Ronin]

7 hours ago, Scott7975 said:

Arm strength doesn’t just mean you can throw the ball far. 

 

Is that supposed to be some sort of epiphany?   Sounds like you merely want to argue despite any basis for it.  

 

Does arm-strength necessarily mean a sound control of the other 90-some% of the game?  

 

Does the lack of iconic arm strength mean that QBs that do not possess that kind of arm-strength are incapable of managing the other 90-some% of the game?  

 

But most relevantly, how does any of this discussion apply to Allen and the schtick on him?   I mean if you're going to leap-frog the entire point just say so rather than beating about the bush.  What you offered is hardly an intelligent and far from a well-though-out response.  

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

6 hours ago, hondo in seattle said:

The Saints have attempted about half as many "deep" passes as the Bills but completed 4 more.  

 

Quality trumps quantity.  

...with the advent of their running game, they are no longer solely dependent upon on Brees.......so attempts do not surprise me......their current formula could take them far........

[Ronin]

38 minutes ago, WideNine said:

 

I want to argue against this, but I do think that a QB that can hit all the shorter throws can find success in the league.

 

It is a bit deceiving because having a legit deep ball threat (emphasis on threat) can change how defenses play you. They can be less willing to play man and load the box against the run or short underneath routes. The NFL has tweaked the rules so that there is often a good chance you will get a DPI with or without a completion.

 

Not sure if it is something that does not have value if a team has the tools to pull it off enough and teams have to respect and defend against it.

 

Well, consider, Brady's a master of the short-throw.  Not to insinuate that he doesn't throw deep, but he thrives on the short-medium game fwiw.  If there's a reason why he'll be able to play longer than average for a QB that will have at least something to do with it.  

 

I'll also throw in that isofar as we're concerned, and for those that haven't noticed, but Allen's YPA is the worst in the league of any starters, in fact, he's the only one that not above 6.0 and that includes all of the other rookies and a bunch of inept QBs.  We also haven't scared anyone with any deep connections we can add.  I think that those two things speak more than anything in this discussion.  

 

The point really has nothing to do with what the deep ball, or even the threat of it "changes how defenses play you," but rather how much more important the other 90-some% part of the passing game is.  And frankly, yes, it can change the way that defenses play you, but then you'd better have a QB that's capable of adjusting to such changes.  Changes such as ... what?  

 

How about increased pass-pressure.  Is that part of "The Process/Allen/emphasis on the deep game?"  Was that listed as one of Allen's traits coming out, the ability to adjust to pressure and read Ds, changing Ds as you imply?  Hardly.  To the contrary.  

 

That falls under the umbrella of "you'd better be careful what you ask for, you may get it," wouldn't you agree?  

 

If you're going to emphasize the deep passing game, then it would be wise to have a well-above-average OL.  Did McBeane factor that in?  I don't see it.  Neither has anyone else.  

 

You'd better have WRs capable of making comparable reads and with both the physical and mental skills to assist the QB under such circumstances.  Did McBeane seem to have focused on any of that?  Hardly.  

 

Some will argue that that's all the next step, but finding an entire cadre of capable WRs & TE, a RB capable of replacing Shady, at least 3 likely 4 starting spots on the OL, not to mention having to replace your top two defensive players who will both be 36 next season along with other needs on D is hardly a one-offseason undertaking, more like three or four as the original talent, what little there is, also comes to the ends of their contracts.  

 

Again, reliance upon the deep game does not win games, it's merely one element of any number of offensive options and strategies that should all fit together into a "big picture" kinda thing, but when you completely ignore the vast majority of the passing game in favor of a very tiny aspect and percentage of it to the extent that in exchange for a "strong arm" you essentially neglect all other aspects and elements of an above-average passing game, as McBeane have done, it hardly suggests competence.  Or do you think that it does in fact suggest competence?  

Edited November 15, 2018 by TaskersGhost

[John from Riverside]

9 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

Well, consider, Brady's a master of the short-throw.  Not to insinuate that he doesn't throw deep, but he thrives on the short-medium game fwiw.  If there's a reason why he'll be able to play longer than average for a QB that will have at least something to do with it.  

 

I'll also throw in that isofar as we're concerned, and for those that haven't noticed, but Allen's YPA is the worst in the league of any starters, in fact, he's the only one that not above 6.0 and that includes all of the other rookies and a bunch of inept QBs.  We also haven't scared anyone with any deep connections we can add.  I think that those two things speak more than anything in this discussion.  

 

The point really has nothing to do with what the deep ball, or even the threat of it "changes how defenses play you," but rather how much more important the other 90-some% part of the passing game is.  And frankly, yes, it can change the way that defenses play you, but then you'd better have a QB that's capable of adjusting to such changes.  Changes such as ... what?  

 

How about increased pass-pressure.  Is that part of "The Process/Allen/emphasis on the deep game?"  Was that listed as one of Allen's traits coming out, the ability to adjust to pressure and read Ds, changing Ds as you imply?  Hardly.  To the contrary.  

 

That falls under the umbrella of "you'd better be careful what you ask for, you may get it," wouldn't you agree?  

 

If you're going to emphasize the deep passing game, then it would be wise to have a well-above-average OL.  Did McBeane factor that in?  I don't see it.  Neither has anyone else.  

 

You'd better have WRs capable of making comparable reads and with both the physical and mental skills to assist the QB under such circumstances.  Did McBeane seem to have focused on any of that?  Hardly.  

 

Some will argue that that's all the next step, but finding an entire cadre of capable WRs & TE, a RB capable of replacing Shady, at least 3 likely 4 starting spots on the OL, not to mention having to replace your top two defensive players who will both be 36 next season along with other needs on D is hardly a one-offseason undertaking, more like three or four as the original talent, what little there is, also comes to the ends of their contracts.  

 

Again, reliance upon the deep game does not win games, it's merely one element of any number of offensive options and strategies that should all fit together into a "big picture" kinda thing, but when you completely ignore the vast majority of the passing game in favor of a very tiny aspect and percentage of it to the extent that in exchange for a "strong arm" you essentially neglect all other aspects and elements of an above-average passing game, as McBeane have done, it hardly suggests competence.  Or do you think that it does in fact suggest competence?  

How would you have fixed the situation in a rebiulding year with a dead cap strapped team?   How would Beane have accounted for losing half of his starting offensive line?   He accounted for Glenn by drafting Dawkins but what about the rest of it?

[WideNine]

4 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

Well, consider, Brady's a master of the short-throw.  Not to insinuate that he doesn't throw deep, but he thrives on the short-medium game fwiw.  

 

I'll also throw in that isofar as we're concerned, and for those that haven't notived, but Allen's YPA is the worst in the league of any starters.  We also haven't scared anyone with any deep connections we can add.  I think that those two things speak more than anything in this discussion.  

 

The point really has nothing to do with what the deep ball, or even the threat of it "changes how defenses play you," but rather how much more important the other 90-some% part of the passing game is.  And frankly, yes, it can change the way that defenses play you, but then you'd better have a QB that's capable of adjusting to such changes.  Changes such as ... what?  

 

How about increased pass-pressure.  Is that part of "The Process/Allen/emphasis on the deep game?"  Was that listed as one of Allen's traits coming out, the ability to adjust to pressure and read Ds, changing Ds as you imply?  Hardly.  

 

That falls under the umbrella of "you'd better be careful what you ask for, you may get it," wouldn't you agree?  

 

If you're going to emphasize the deep passing game, then it would be wise to have a well-above-average OL.  Did McBeane factor that in?  I don't see it.  Neither has anyone else.  

 

You'd better have WRs capable of making comparable reads and with both the physical and mental skills to assist the QB under such circumstances.  Did McBeane seem to have focused on any of that?  Hardly.  

 

Again, reliance upon the deep game does not win games, it's merely one element of any number of offensive options and strategies that should all fit together into a "big picture" kinda thing, but when you completely ignore the vast majority of the passing game in favor of a very tiny aspect and percentage of it to the extent that in exchange for a "strong arm" you essentially neglect all other aspects and elements of an above-average passing game, as McBeane have done, it hardly suggests competence.  Or do you think that it does in fact suggest competence?  

 

I am not one to flame folks or be a troll, and you seem to be pretty passionate about our Bills. Whether I agree with you or not I respect that.

 

My response was more to address the chart of deep pass attempts to completion percentage and assessing the value it provides offenses being able make defenses respect that ability.

 

Not quite ready to shoehorn our rookie QB into that discussion.

 

 

 

[Ronin]

5 hours ago, matter2003 said:

Its kind of like Steven Seagal in Marked For Death...

 

The anticipation of death is worse than death itself.

 

The anticipation of the deep throw is worse than the deep throw itself but that in turn opens up the underneath stuff. If you have a QB who you KNEW couldnt throw it over the top you wouldn't have to respect it and they would just compress the short routes to the point those would no longer be relatively easy completions.

 

If you ask me that's a lot of cliche'd gibberish about respecting the deep throw.  Defenses and those that orchestrate them, know just as well that a team does not consistently win games, or even close on successful deep throws, particularly when the short-medium game sucks.  Which is essentially the point here.  

 

What you say would have some merit if the QB in question were good at managing the short-medium game, say for instance Brady and Rodgers or any number of other QBs some of which aren't even good at the deep throws.  But in the absence of that it's hardly a fear, more like an "oh well, we'll pressure the hell outta him and if he happens to connect on a deep throw or two that's fine since we'll stymie the rest of the passing game and likely the entire offense.  

 

Unfortunately, and for sure until further notice since Allen's passing prowess in the short-medium game and generally speaking in terms of reading defenses, McBeane's plan did not include any semblance of reading Ds on pass plays or any sort of focus on ensuring that again, the other 90-some% of the passing game, goes off effectively.  Any argument to the contrary completely overlooks that "their guy" essentially was the Draft's biggest project but one that had a strong arm.  

 

In short, if a QB can't read Ds and isn't good in the short-medium game, I don't think that too many (if any) Ds are overly concerned about losing games based on a few short throws to "open up the underneath stuff" since they really aren't concerned, nor should be, about that same underneath stuff.  

10 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

How would you have fixed the situation in a rebiulding year with a dead cap strapped team?   How would Beane have accounted for losing half of his starting offensive line?   He accounted for Glenn by drafting Dawkins but what about the rest of it?

 

I wouldn't have been in this mess to begin with, so the question doesn't apply.  I certainly wouldn't have drafted Zay Jones and would have taken Smith-Shuster instead.  Was on record for that one.  So don't lay their inabilities and senselessness at my feet.  

 

I also wouldn't be panty-raiding the Carolina waiver wire and sure as hell wouldn't have given Lotolulei anymore than a pittance to play here, guy's been below-average for years.  

 

I also would have traded Shady while he was worth something and recognized that the team needed an actual rebuild instead of this idiocy of being able to compete with what we have.  

 

Again, you're asking me to clean up someone else's mess.  It's their mess, I'm merely commenting on the lack of effective brainstorming on the part of the current braintrust.  If that's not what forums are for, well then just shut 'em down.  

 

BTW, I also would have used our five picks ranging from 12th overall to 65th overall (1st pick in the 3rd round) and 5 picks on days 1 & 2 with four of the five in the first two rounds on 5 players, not 2, one of which would have been Edmunds anyway.  

 

Edited November 15, 2018 by TaskersGhost

[Ronin]

24 minutes ago, WideNine said:

 

I am not one to flame folks or be a troll, and you seem to be pretty passionate about our Bills. Whether I agree with you or not I respect that.

 

My response was more to address the chart of deep pass attempts to completion percentage and assessing the value it provides offenses being able make defenses respect that ability.

 

Not quite ready to shoehorn our rookie QB into that discussion.

 

 

 

 

I don't care about "flaming or trolling," speak your mind.  

 

But consider, this isn't about you or I, my point entirely was about how little influence or even impact the deep-passing game has compared to the lipservice that it receives, A, and B, that if that is one's strategy that one had better think things through entirely and not neglect other enormous and far more impactful elements of the game in favor of one relatively minor element, not even necessarily amidst average play otherwise, but below-average, at least insofar as Draft criteria goes.  

 

Ergo, it's not a matter of "shoehorning anyone into anything," it's entirely a matter of strategy and vision (or lack thereof) being employed by McBeane.  Like it or not they, McBeane, are going to have to "shoehorn" Allen into the role, ready or not.  Sitting on the sidelines is only going to help a QB that has historically struggled to read Ds, make changes, and manage the short-medium game so much and that's hardly enough to correct it all by a long shot.  

 

This entire conversation off my end is entirely  about how the deep-passing game is overrated compared to the short-medium game, particularly if the latter, which is again, over 90% of the passing game, is neglected in favor of the former, which is merely a few percent of the passing game.  

 

[CASE IN POINT:  Would you rather have right now a QB that's not only capable but above-average in reading Ds and connecting efficiently and effectively on throws of 30 yards or under, or a QB that has demonstrated absolutely no wherewithal whatsoever in being able to do that at all in the NFL much less to an above-average level, but one that can wing a ball 70 yards consistently?  And frankly, I'm entirely unaware of any NFL QB that cannot accurately throw at least 50 yards.  Not sure what you remember about our glory years if you were there, but the thing about Kelly is that he was never a deep-ball QB, in fact he rarely threw much beyond 50 in the air and it was a cold day (pun intended) when he threw for much beyond 30 or 40, yet ... ]

 

The answer to that one obviously comes down to what one thinks is more important, the mental abilities relating to the reading of Defenses and an ability to react to that, which is typically not audibling into deep throws, rather the opposite;  OR, the ability to not doo those things but the ability to heave a ball the length of the field.  I dare say that the former is infinitely more important and that the latter may never even develop into a starter because he doesn't nor ever did have the fundamental elements down and is fighting an uphill battle in terms of attempting to change that in the NFL based on NFL draft history.  

 

When this is factored in with my earlier comments about how the benefits of that deep-game aren't even remotely realized unless the elements of the non-deep-game are in place, and for which they are far from being in place at the moment, then the entire strategy becomes defunct.  

 

It merely adds insult to injury as it were when the benefits of that deep passing game aren't even being realized.  Then you're left with nothing as is the case with us now.  There's been no semblance of anything even approaching an average deep-passing game much less a top notch one, with Allen that is.  

 

As they say, show me.  I'm not even seeing a deep game.  (side note)  

Edited November 16, 2018 by TaskersGhost

[John from Riverside]

18 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

If you ask me that's a lot of cliche'd gibberish about respecting the deep throw.  Defenses and those that orchestrate them, know just as well that a team does not consistently win games, or even close on successful deep throws, particularly when the short-medium game sucks.  Which is essentially the point here.  

 

What you say would have some merit if the QB in question were good at managing the short-medium game, say for instance Brady and Rodgers or any number of other QBs some of which aren't even good at the deep throws.  But in the absence of that it's hardly a fear, more like an "oh well, we'll pressure the hell outta him and if he happens to connect on a deep throw or two that's fine since we'll stymie the rest of the passing game and likely the entire offense.  

 

Unfortunately, and for sure until further notice since Allen's passing prowess in the short-medium game and generally speaking in terms of reading defenses, McBeane's plan did not include any semblance of reading Ds on pass plays or any sort of focus on ensuring that again, the other 90-some% of the passing game, goes off effectively.  Any argument to the contrary completely overlooks that "their guy" essentially was the Draft's biggest project but one that had a strong arm.  

 

In short, if a QB can't read Ds and isn't good in the short-medium game, I don't think that too many (if any) Ds are overly concerned about losing games based on a few short throws to "open up the underneath stuff" since they really aren't concerned, nor should be, about that same underneath stuff.  

 

I wouldn't have been in this mess to begin with, so the question doesn't apply.  I certainly wouldn't have drafted Zay Jones and would have taken Smith-Shuster instead.  Was on record for that one.  So don't lay their inabilities and senselessness at my feet.  

 

I also wouldn't be panty-raiding the Carolina waiver wire and sure as hell wouldn't have given Lotolulei anymore than a pittance to play here, guy's been below-average for years.  

 

I also would have traded Shady while he was worth something and recognized that the team needed an actual rebuild instead of this idiocy of being able to compete with what we have.  

 

Again, you're asking me to clean up someone else's mess.  It's their mess, I'm merely commenting on the lack of effective brainstorming on the part of the current braintrust.  If that's not what forums are for, well then just shut 'em down.  

 

BTW, I also would have used our five picks ranging from 12th overall to 65th overall (1st pick in the 3rd round) and 5 picks on days 1 & 2 with four of the five in the first two rounds on 5 players, not 2, one of which would have been Edmunds anyway.  

 

Every single damn time this question is asked this is the cop out answer.....every single time.

 

THE TRAIN HAS LEFT THE STATION......think past "well i wouldnt have done this to begin with".....its happened....get past it......enough

 

What would you have done after these moves were made?

[JerseyBills]

7 hours ago, Juice_32 said:

When healthy Allen was throwing to a few deep middle crossing routes per game. I'd guess many of them were right at the 20 yard level. Most people probably associate "deep" (me included) with sideline go routes.

Yup. I'm excited to see him with a More speedy WR corps. He just missed Foster on a couple bombs , but Foster looks like he worked hard and got coached up on running those deep routes. McKenzie looks super dangerous with the ball in his hands and has great speed. Thompson is back. Zay looks like the guy we expected to get when we moved in the 2nd Rd. 

 

I also think these players allow Daboll to run his scheme how he envisioned it to look and make defenses respect the deep ball,which opens up the run game . 

 

 

 

[Ronin]

6 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

Every single damn time this question is asked this is the cop out answer.....every single time.

 

THE TRAIN HAS LEFT THE STATION......think past "well i wouldnt have done this to begin with".....its happened....get past it......enough

 

What would you have done after these moves were made?

 

Like I said, the train never would have left the station on my watch.  

 

I think I at least partially answered your question, don't be a lamebrain.  

 

I SAID, I WOULDN'T HAVE used five picks ranging from 12th overall to 65th overall, to enlighten you, that would have been 2 mid-1st round picks, 2 mid-late 2nd-round picks, and the 1st pic in the 3rd round, on two players when I could have gotten 5.  If you can't read and comprehend that then return to elementary school and repeat the 4th grade.  

 

Talk about copouts, repeating the same idiotic nonsense while ignoring an answer seems to apply.  

 

I'll also REPEAT what I implied as well, namely that I WOULD HAVE treated this team as a roster in need of a rebuild that it so sorely needs and not consumed a rare draft on a project QB that DID NOT POSSESS the traits of every successful QB that has played in the NFL while going in full speed for a singular trait such as arm-strength when that approach has been attempted far more often with negative results than positive ones, and that, for prospects not nearly as project-oriented.  

 

Your self-righteous approach in discussing this misses the original point that I made entirely.  I was merely corresponding the impact of deep-throws, for the best QBs on the best offenses, with the host of other aspects of the passing game and relating that to the overall "rebuilding" strategy if you want to call it that since McBeane doesn't, and demonstrating that it's akin to buying a lottery ticket and NOT a sound approach to rebuilding.  

 

I'm really sorry that you're struggling with that trivial nature of that all.  Truly.