Ok, when they figure out how to stop it it will open something else up. They have to scheme for Adams. You don’t get rid if those types of players
same could be said of any position outside of QB and even then your QB can throw 4 TDs and you still lose. I could flip it and say "daniel jones threw 4 TDs but they lost becuase there is only so much an elite QB can do"
I'm not sure how they can stop it. he will run around lineman and blows up RBs and TEs with a bull rush
Yes that can be said for any position outside QB. Which is why good teams that stay good are build to be good at most positions instead of great at a couple and bad at the rest. As for Jones, you can't really flip it. The Giants lost despite his performance, but his unit wasn't responsible for the loss. Adams couldn't even make his unit play well. Which isn't his fault, he was great. But again, there's only so much a safety can do.
which is exactly my point. even when a QB has an elite game and drops 4 TDs you can still lose. which is why a well rounded team is important and having a few elite players mixed in is what makes the difference. Regardless of their position.
even when a QB has an elite game and drops 4 TDs you can still lose. True (but rare). which is why a well rounded team is important and having a few elite players mixed in is what makes the difference. True. Regardless of their position. False.
not that rare. i mean we just did it to the giants. the seahawks also lost a game this year when wilson threw 4 TDs and they are a good and well rounded team that is going to make the playoffs. and position isn't super important. sure QB is the most important because they control the ball and the only player to touch it on every offensive snap. and yeah punter and kicker isn't as important because they only play a few downs a game. But it really goes by downs and impact players at any position will impact a game. sometimes we can't see the impact watching the game but it doesn't mean it isn't there.
There are 256 games played every season. That you can identify two games in over half a season where that happened (and I'm sure there were also a few more) doesn't mean it isn't rare. And position is important. For instance, offensive tackles and pass rushers are more important than the other non-QB positions. If you build a team around the wrong positions, you end up in the boat we're in now. Now I'm not saying Adams isn't a great player and that he isn't valuable. But if we could get a Khalil Mack-style return for trading him, I think we have to do it, especially considering in a couple years from now he's going to be a very expensive safety.
Nitpicking here but should be set straight either way. False....there are direct snaps to others rather than the QB...quite often actually. So the qb does not necessarily touch the ball every play. The center is the only one who actually does touch the ball at the start of every play. Your point stands but it was arrived at somewhat misleadingly lol.
Since 2000 QBs who have thrown for 4 touchdowns or more have a combined record of 369-77-2 and 2 of those 77 losses came this year from Danny Dimes lol. They are 14-6 in playoffs however.
You looked it up, kudos! By comparison, Belichick's record with the Pats (which began in 2000) is 234-80 in the regular season and 30-10 in the playoffs. So that's a 0.826 winning percentage for QBs with 4+ TDs and a 0.745 winning percentage for Belichick.
Pro football reference is a terrific tool just for shits and giggles — QBs who throw 5 touchdowns are 81-11 for .880 winning % QBs who throw 6 touchdowns are 17-3 for .850 winning. (Mahomes Eli and Palmer all lost throwing 6) QBs who throw 7 touchdowns are 3-0 (the game Eli lost in his 6 TD game was when Brees threw 7)
you would have to only count the games in which a QB threw 4 TDs though. it doesn't happen every 256 games lol it happens in like 1-2 games a week so really more like 17-34 a season. if 2-3 are losses that's 12% to 6%. obviously not common but not super rare either. and you say OTs are important but again how? sure a great OT can nuetrilize 1 player, but the D will swap that player around if elite to face the other tackle. or if the interior sucks and a guy like donald wrecks them then what good is the elite LT when the other 4 lineman fail. the pressure is sitll there. everything in football is connected. every position is important. that mack trade isn't working out well for the bears at all and they are paying him QB money. and he has less sacks then adams this season
lol ok technically you are right about the C but that's pre snap. he doesn't control where the ball goes nor touches it after the 1st .1 seconds of a play. and direct snaps are pretty rare. we've done maybe 2 all year if that? but i guess saying the QB touches the ball on 99.9% of plays is more accurate
so about 17-18% of the time teams lose when their QB throws 4 TDs. that's not that rare at all. almost 1 out of 5 games.
i mean i get that. but that trade didn't work for the raiders either. their D is horrible and mack had more sacks then the entire raiders team in 2018 IIRC. raiders pass rush has been dead last in the NFL and they just used a top 5 pick on an edge rusher who hasn't done anything yet. I think both teams would take it back of they could
@dawinner127 counted all the games for me and found teams win over 80% of the time when their QB throws 4+ TDs. So I consider a loss in that situation rare. If the defense swaps their best rusher to the right side because the LT is elite, you just ensured the QB can see the rusher coming at him. And if the LT can stop an elite rusher one on one, that allows the other linemen to double team other rushers. As for the Mack trade, I was one of the few on this board who agreed with the Raiders. An edge rusher is more important than a safety, but on a bad team that has a ton of holes, they're both worth trading for a bounty of picks instead of paying a ton of money to. One other point regarding Adams: can we guarantee that he'll continue being the same elite player once we pay him? Or is he going to check out/act up if the team keeps losing because he already got paid? You have to factor that in.
20% isn't rare though. more uncommon. rare is like 5% or less chance at least in my opinion. like if the chance of hitting the lotto was 20% you wouldn't think it's rare. most "rare" things with gambling and the huge payouts have way less then a 1% chance to hit. 20% isn't rare at all. it's more likely to happen then rolling a specific number on a die
