Originally posted by BleedsRedNGold:
Originally posted by the_dynasty:
That doesn't conflict with anything that was said. Was Jimmy not asked to do a lot ? He wasn't.
This is the equivalent of someone saying : "he never had to work an ounce in his life once he got out of college" and the opponent saying : "he won 100 million in lottery his senior year of college, why would he care to work" ?
They aren't mutually exclusive. A quarterback that passes six times isn't asked to do a lot by definition. It's not inherently his fault at all, but it is still the truth.
You're not arguing in good faith. You know what that statement implies. It implies Jimmy wasn't asked to do much because he's not that good of a QB. Jimmy wasn't asked to do much because the run game was unstoppable. On the flip side, if Jimmy threw for 400 yards that game and Mostert only had 6 carries for 25 yds, it wouldn't imply that Mostert sucked as a RB. The facts would have shown that the defense couldn't stop the pass.
The outcome of that GB game was Coaching 101: "If your opponent can't stop it, keep doing it until they do."
The problem is, there is truth to what he said that goes beyond that game. It perhaps wasn't a good argument for him to make, given that it's rhetoric focusing on the extreme scenario. But, we can clearly see in the data that the passing game is somewhat limited, and the eye test suggests the reason is because of Jimmy being somewhat limited. One need only look at the vertical explosion that occurred against the Texans (Trey led the entire NFL in intended air yards per attempt, led the entire NFL in air-yards-to-the-sticks) to see that it is indeed the quarterback, in some way or another, dictating how the offense is called. Of course, you'd WANT your play-caller to tailor his offense after the strengths of his QB, and use it to hide his QB's weaknesses.