Plusses and Minuses vs. Ravens

[30gut]

Originally Posted by That Guy

it's not really rhetorical or hyperbole, his career average is 1 sack every 7 attempts.

I don't understand why you feel the need to respond to my posts when the majority of your post doesn't address anything that I've said? Why not just post your thoughts into the thread directly without the guise of being a response?

Anyhow your question wasn't about sacks it was about injury. Remember.

Originally Posted by That Guy

do you honestly think rgiii could have gotten 27 passes off without getting hurt again?

So once again, you are moving the goal posts. You say one thing then argue about something else.

his preseason average this year was 1 sack per 4 attempts. compare that to the other QBs behind the same offensive line, it's not even close

First of all, we're talking about preseason. Preseason. If you want to use preseason averages as barometer for regular season play be my guest. But don't expect me to argue over them as if it has any real bearing.

And to be clear over the course of the preseason the other QBs didn't play behind the same OL nor in the same circumstances. Saying they played behind the same offensive line isn't even close to the truth. That's just a clear, out right fabrication.

[over the mountain]

Originally Posted by 30gut

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blo...dskins-ravens/



Top 5 graded players:

1. LB Perry Riley (+3.6)

Doh! lol .. I said riley seemed invisible so far this preseason. I owe you an apology Mr. Riley.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by 30gut

I don't understand why you feel the need to respond to my posts when the majority of your post doesn't address anything that I've said? Why not just post your thoughts into the thread directly without the guise of being a response?

Anyhow your question wasn't about sacks it was about injury. Remember.So once again, you are moving the goal posts. You say one thing then argue about something else.

First of all, we're talking about preseason. Preseason. If you want to use preseason averages as barometer for regular season play be my guest. But don't expect me to argue over them as if it has any real bearing.

And to be clear over the course of the preseason the other QBs didn't play behind the same OL nor in the same circumstances. Saying they played behind the same offensive line isn't even close to the truth. That's just a clear, out right fabrication.

so i've got to get permission from you to respond to your posts now? and how am i moving the goal posts? sacks = big hits = potential injuries. that doesn't seem that hard to follow. you really seem to like to deflect.

how many times was robert hit/sacked last year vs the other two qbs? how many times this preseason? how often did our other qb's get hurt and miss games the last 3-4 years? we gave up 0 sacks vs baltimore. I don't think it's hard to follow, griffin gets hit too much, and you can see that the OL isn't as big a factor as your claiming when you look over the course of the last two years. robert gets hit a lot and others don't in the same situations, meaning that he's doing something that causes that (it's beyond the margin of error). This isn't rocket science, and i don't see why you have such a hard time with having him be accountable for his shortcomings.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by DYoungJelly

And what did you think of not drafting a QB this year?

Loved it, loved watching our 1b QB play the entire 4th preseason game. No risk there.

Also loved not drafting a TE either.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by That Guy

so i've got to get permission from you to respond to your posts now?

You can do whatever you like, never said you couldn't. I did ask you why you bothered responding to my posts when you don't intend to respond to anything in the actual post. You know? You literally responded to nothing in my post. Rather you continued an anti-Griffin diatribe which is fine, but has nothing to do with the post you responded.
Remember?

Originally Posted by 30gut

They have got to find a competent TE in base personnel. I think the lack of success in the 1st unit base personnel runs is because Compton at TE invites teams to sell out run commit or at the very least commit his defender to 100% run. Gotta find a better answer.....or don't run from base personnel/formations?

Good to see the screens game, which was missing in the 1st 2 preseason games. We saw 2 screens in the 1st 2 series 1 WR screen(intercepted) and 1 RB screen against 2nd and long. Even saw some hurry up which is good.

If Kirk was playing as short a stint as Griffin vs the Lions he would have been 3-5 with 1 INT and 1 Fumbles snap.

Kirk took a helacious hit against a blitz on a pass that was broken up which luckily wasn't picked off and almost got Grant sent to the hospital. If it was Griffin throwing that pass he would have crucified, that would have been used in the referendum rhetoric.

Kirk and 1st unit offense didn't cross the 50 yard line til 6 minutes left in the 2nd qtr.
And the 2 minute drill TD drive was against the Ravens 2nd unit defense.

But it was good to see the offense get going eventually.
I like seeing Keenan suplex that WR.
Nice seeing 1st unit defense get a goalline stop even though it was against their 2nd O.

o I saw Reed make an effective block in the 1st qtr....maybe there's hope?

o Grant, Crowder and Jones looked good again

o Colt is the master of the bootleg, even under duress

Your response:

Originally Posted by That Guy

do you honestly think rgiii could have gotten 27 passes off without getting hurt again? that's like 7 sacks minimum for him...{non-related Griffin diatribe}

But now that you've seen the original post again maybe there is something you would actually want to respond to non-Griffin related? I won't hold my breath.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

and how am i moving the goal posts? sacks = big hits = potential injuries. that doesn't seem that hard to follow.

You move the goal posts by asking a question (rhetorical one at that; which is posted above) about Griffin getting hurt then proceed to discuss sacks. Its like asking a question about elusiveness then talking about speed. They're related but not the same.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by That Guy

how many times was robert hit/sacked last year vs the other two qbs? how many times this preseason? how often did our other qb's get hurt and miss games the last 3-4 years? we gave up 0 sacks vs baltimore. I don't think it's hard to follow

Do any of your rhetorical questions have a point? I can tell you don't even know the full answer to your questions because Griffin and Colt were sacked at about the same rate last year. And again if you want to be accurate playing without Trent Williams and with a back-up LT puts whomever plays QB at a disadvantage. That is fact. I mean you can ignore that fact if it suits your point and you don't care about context. But it is a fact that against the Tampa Bay and the 49ers Griffin played without Trent. None of the other QBs played without Trent at LT.

Even more then regular season preseason evaluation requires close attention to situation/context. But if you want to use preseason sack % as a barometer for anything knock your self out. But it doesn't make much sense to me. Its like using preseason to say that Rashard Ross is going to lead the team in receptions or that Zach Zenner is going to be a top 5 rusher. But the fact about the Lions game that you keep bringing up was the pass protection was no adequate. In that game we started, started Willie Smith at LT our 4th OT. (Willie Smith who is no longer on the team btw). Hmmmnnn Willie Smith or Trent Williams...Trent Williams or Willie Smith...I wonder which one gives the QB better protection from taking sacks?

griffin gets hit too much, and you can see that the OL isn't as big a factor as your claiming when you look over the course of the last two years. robert gets hit a lot and others don't in the same situations, meaning that he's doing something that causes that (it's beyond the margin of error).

First why don't you start off by discussing something you can actually account for like sacks (as opposed to hits aren't recorded by QB). So again a key point you keep repeating is that the sack rate vs Griffin and the other QBs. But, and I'm sure you'll move the goal post here, but Griffin and Colt have about the same sack rate. So you wrong when it comes to Colt right off the bat.

This isn't rocket science, and i don't see why you have such a hard time with having him be accountable for his shortcomings

All this bluster and talk over a false assumption on your part. My post wasn't about Robert talking sacks or not taking sacks. I guess you, in a round about way wanted to talk about Griffin taking sacks and if that was your point. Then I would have agreed. In fact I've posted about Griffin, Colt and Kirk in detail about who takes more sacks, gets rid of the ball faster, etc in much more detail and accuracy then you. But thanks for telling me something I knew a long time ago.

[That Guy]

griffin has looked terrible, and i'm tired of excuses. that was the original point referring specifically to you once again stating that griffin would have been crucified for that throw/hit, pointing out how kirk's stat would have looked at their worst (griffin could have played longer, but, oh yeah, he gets hurt). RGIII is not a victim of cosmic circumstance, he's a player that's having trouble doing the basic things required to be successful.

you should also stop referring to questions as rhetorical when they aren't. that's the 2nd time you've done that in 3 posts. for the record his sack rate is higher than the other QBs this year and last year, he got hit more, he's gotten hurt more. those are all facts, so i'm actually not wrong. 15.4% >> 13.2%, but i was really referring to kirk (3.9%), and i'm sure you know that, but it doesn't fit your narrative as well.

[WillH]

Originally Posted by That Guy

griffin has looked terrible, and i'm tired of excuses. that was the original point referring specifically to you once again stating that griffin would have been crucified for that throw/hit, pointing out how kirk's stat would have looked at their worst (griffin could have played longer, but, oh yeah, he gets hurt). RGIII is not a victim of cosmic circumstance, he's a player that's having trouble doing the basic things required to be successful.

you should also stop referring to questions as rhetorical when they aren't. that's the 2nd time you've done that in 3 posts. for the record his sack rate is higher than the other QBs this year and last year, he got hit more, he's gotten hurt more. those are all facts, so i'm actually not wrong. 15.4% >> 13.2%, but i was really referring to kirk (3.9%), and i'm sure you know that, but it doesn't fit your narrative as well.

I tend to agree more with you on this debate, but, those questions do seem rhetorical. You weren't really asking for the answer, you knew the answer already, you were asking them to make a point. It was part of your rhetoric.

Unless, did you not know the answer to those questions? See, that was not rhetorical because I honestly don't know the answer, so I am asking, not just trying to make a point.

How long are you two going to fight about this anyway? That was a rhetorical question, because I don't want an answer, I'm just making a point.

The more you know . . .

[30gut]

If you had said Griffin has a higher sack rate then Cousins, (which you didn't) I would have agreed and like I told you already that would be very, very old news.

Originally Posted by That Guy

. got hit more, he's gotten hurt more. those are all facts, so i'm actually not wrong. 15.4% >> 13.2%, but i was really referring to kirk (3.9%), and i'm sure you know that, but it doesn't fit your narrative as well.

Lol, how are you gonna quantify Griffin getting hit more? Do you personally chart individual QB hits? Lol. So your 'he got hit more' is not a fact its an opinion.

Lol, oh but you were really referring to Kirk, which you didn't type but i should know but it doesn't fit my narrative? Lol, dude have some accountability for what you type.

This is pretty much what I predicted:

Originally Posted by 30gut

First why don't you start off by discussing something you can actually account for like sacks (as opposed to hits aren't recorded by QB). So again a key point you keep repeating is that the sack rate vs Griffin and the other QBs. But, and I'm sure you'll move the goal post here, but Griffin and Colt have about the same sack rate. So you wrong when it comes to Colt right off the bat.

[htownskinfan]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Another minus...John Harbaugh is a effing dickhead. The yelling at Gruden thing was like "wtf, its preseason. chill" and then the reporter thing at halftime was just unacceptable. What a dick for zero reasons.

I'm in the middle of watching the game,just saw that with Harbaugh at halftime and wondered if anyone else commented on that.Like you said,what a dick.And thats the Ravens sideline reporter,its not even a hostile reporter.Harbaugh got the dude all flustered.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by 30gut

If you had said Griffin has a higher sack rate then Cousins, (which you didn't) I would have agreed and like I told you already that would be very, very old news.

Lol, how are you gonna quantify Griffin getting hit more? Do you personally chart individual QB hits? Lol. So your 'he got hit more' is not a fact its an opinion.

Lol, oh but you were really referring to Kirk, which you didn't type but i should know but it doesn't fit my narrative? Lol, dude have some accountability for what you type.

This is pretty much what I predicted:

either you're being purposefully obtuse or you need things spelled out.

griffin has issues and we shouldn't be making excuses in his 4th year after seeing what we've seen. that's the point. the hits/sacks/injuries are a symptom of his lack of pocket presence, and used as an example, which you've gone off on a tirade/tangent about, but that's just deflecting from the main point, which you either missed completely or chose to ignore.

why would i be referring to colt when he's not the one starting? and by the way, his sack rate was still lower, so you're still wrong even if you want to go with that convenient colt/bob comparison. if you think 15% difference is "basically the same" i'd love to sell you my car for 15% over what it's actually worth. and congrats on predicting that i'd call you out on trying to make a strawman by using the worst possible comparison and still being wrong. do you want a cookie?

seriously.

[JoeRedskin]

He 's being purposely obtuse. If you spell things out, he'll just tell you "oh, that's the wrong word so it doesn't matter how you spell it."

and people accuse me of being long winded.

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk

[30gut]

Originally Posted by That Guy

either you're being purposefully obtuse or you need things spelled out

seriously.

Lol, seriously......obtuse. Yeah, that's it. When all else fails get personal huh? Sweet.

Your posts are rhetorical questions that are psuedo responses with no attempt made at addressing the actual posts to which you respond. You say/type one thing then lol start whining that you really meant this other thing that I should know. C'mon really who does that.

And for the final time the point you were trying to make (after many shifts/switches/swaps) is patently obvious and has been stated by others, myself included in far more detail with far more accuracy. News flash Kirk has a lower sack rate then Griffin.

Your 'that guy', lol.

Now that you finally finished your profound revaltion are you gonna respond to anything else in my post?

Proly not huh?
Cheers, you're the best...lol...'that guy'

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

He 's being purposely obtuse. If you spell things out, he'll just tell you "oh, that's the wrong word so it doesn't matter how you spell it."

and people accuse me of being long winded.

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk

...only in a most respectful way

[JoeRedskin]

lol

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk