Any chance the Tanner Lee story isn't 100 percent true?

[In the Deed the Glory]

I don't know how good Lee can be, but he is a hell of a lot better of a QB than Tommy Armstrong or Taylor Martinez in the passing game.  I am thankful for that.

 

Also, for those saying this is not how a high draft pick plays, did you watch supposed #1 pick Josh Allen and Wyoming?  Tanner Lee is better than him.

[Mavric]

1 minute ago, In the Deed the Glory said:

Also, for those saying this is not how a high draft pick plays, did you watch supposed #1 pick Josh Allen and Wyoming?  Tanner Lee is better than him.

 

Unfortunately it is probably more of people putting unrealistic hype out there.  He definitely didn't look good.  

 

Prior to last year people we talking about Mitch Leidner being a high draft pick.  He went undrafted.

[In the Deed the Glory]

Just now, Mavric said:

 

Unfortunately it is probably more of people putting unrealistic hype out there.  He definitely didn't look good.  

 

Prior to last year people we talking about Mitch Leidner being a high draft pick.  He went undrafted.

 

I agree with your points, I just think it is too early to decide how good he is going to be when he played his first game in two years last night.  I want to see how he does in a larger sample size.

[zoogs]

5 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

It might have been a completion.  If he had caught it.  

Haha, right.

 

I think it reflects the mindset. If we're being really conservative on offense and don't have a guy who can make these throws, then you have to prioritize checkdowns. But as for how good/bad a decision this was to go deep, I think the throw speaks for itself. There's definitely a better example of a decision that Lee would like to have back from last night -- maybe two or three better ones.

[Mavric]

Just now, zoogs said:

Haha, right.

 

I think it reflects the mindset. If we're being really conservative on offense and don't have a guy who can make these throws, then you have to prioritize checkdowns. But as for how good/bad a decision this was to go deep, I think the throw speaks for itself. There's definitely a better example of a decision that Lee would like to have back from last night -- maybe two or three better ones.

 

I don't have a problem with any one decision.  That was just one example of several times I think he could have found a better option had he worked through his progression.

[zoogs]

How many long pass plays end up complete, but we don't ask this same question of? I'm sure you'll find some really open checkdowns on a lot of plays. I question that this is evidence of it being the "right" move.

 

Progressions are just that -- you move past one, you don't really get it back. If it's 50/50 or even clearly the right call the stick with the first one, then I don't think "going through progressions" is the correct critique here. At the other end there's a "always incorrectly/prematurely abandoning the read" move. I'm actually pretty comfortable with where Lee seems to be in this regard.

 

However, I do agree that Lee has progress (   ) to make on his decision-making. There's a long way to go!

[MyBloodIsRed16]

19 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Right where he's supposed to be and wide open.  

Yeah five yards behind where Lee is and Lee is on the move with guys coming at him.  He would have made the same mistake he did on his very first throw.  You don't throw across your body.  It's also easy for Sam to say it's a better option  but  I can guarantee Lee can't even see Hoppes on this play.  Unless he stops turns his entire body and throws, thats not a throw you want.  Plus if he does that he's taking one in the chops.  Unfortunately he had two options on that play.. it was Reimers and whoever was the short route on the sideline.  

[In the Deed the Glory]

Just now, MyBloodIsRed16 said:

Yeah five yards behind where Lee is and Lee is on the move with guys coming at him.  He would have made the same mistake he did on his very first throw.  You don't throw across your body.  It's also easy for Sam to say it's a better option  but  I can guarantee Lee can't even see Hoppes on this play.  Unless he stops turns his entire body and throws, thats not a throw you want.  Plus if he does that he's taking one in the chops.  Unfortunately he had two options on that play.. it was Reimers and whoever was the short route on the sideline.  

 

Add to that the fact that Reimers should have caught the ball.  That was a very well thrown ball.  

[Mavric]

3 minutes ago, MyBloodIsRed16 said:

Yeah five yards behind where Lee is and Lee is on the move with guys coming at him.  He would have made the same mistake he did on his very first throw.  You don't throw across your body.  It's also easy for Sam to say it's a better option  but  I can guarantee Lee can't even see Hoppes on this play.  Unless he stops turns his entire body and throws, thats not a throw you want.  Plus if he does that he's taking one in the chops.  Unfortunately he had two options on that play.. it was Reimers and whoever was the short route on the sideline.  

 

Yes, that's how the play is designed.  He's supposed to block for a couple counts so the defense loses him and then release as a safety valve.  Lee would have known this was his outlet.

[Mavric]

3 minutes ago, In the Deed the Glory said:

Add to that the fact that Reimers should have caught the ball.  That was a very well thrown ball.  

 

Not really.  It was underthrown and behind him.  Plus, you can't really tell from that angle but it was well to the out-of-bounds side of the line so it would have been a pretty tough catch if he had been coming towards it instead of running away from it.

[zoogs]

To add: the fact that we're NOT a check-down offense (which is not an illegitimate way to go, to be clear) that considers bypassing Option A on plays such as this dictates the game. It's what helps the checkdown be so open all the times when the deep option isn't there, for example. By really forcing them to defend that, it opens up not just the pass but the run. Everything looks different if we adjust the philosophy to render "Abandon A, go to Checkdown" the coaching point from this play.

 

Maybe I'm wrong, and maybe that actually is the correct coaching point for Langs. I don't honestly know. Just my minimally informed take on this. I agree with Sam on a lot of stuff, but not in this case.

 

[I do agree that Lee can find Hoppes on this play if he needs to bail on the primary.]

[MyBloodIsRed16]

1 hour ago, Mavric said:

 

Yes, that's how the play is designed.  He's supposed to block for a couple counts so the defense loses him and then release as a safety valve.  Lee would have known this was his outlet.

Agree..... If Lee wasn't flused out of the pocket.  I find it hard to believe he was supposed to be out of the pocket that far and look back to his left for an outlet.  It's called the golden rule of quarterbacking for a reason.  More often than not it results in an INT.  Looks like it was supposed to be a play action with a half roll but there was a defender in the backfield right away and Lee took off. If you were watching the end zone view of this play I don't think you would expect him to throw to Hoppes

[Mavric]

1 minute ago, MyBloodIsRed16 said:

Agree..... If Lee wasn't flused out of the pocket.  I find it hard to believe he was supposed to be out of the pocket that far and look back to his left for an outlet.  It's called the golden rule of quarterbacking for a reason.  More often than not it results in an INT.  Looks like it was supposed to be a play action with a half roll but there was a defender in the backfield right away and Lee took off. If you were watching the end zone view of this play I don't think you would expect him to throw to Hoppes

 

He wasn't flushed out of the pocket.  It was a designed rollout with receivers at three levels on that side of the field - all along or headed to the sideline - to him options.  That's a pretty basic route concept and play.

[MyBloodIsRed16]

2 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

He wasn't flushed out of the pocket.  It was a designed rollout with receivers at three levels on that side of the field - all along or headed to the sideline - to him options.  That's a pretty basic route concept and play.

Yeah your right Knevel didn't wiff on his block and 25 wasn't giving chase to Lee.  I'm familiar with with the concept most people would call it a flood.  The only problem was Hoppes was not headed to the sideline.  I guess technically he was but he took like 3 steps.  If Lee is supposed to look Hoppes way this play needs to be struck from the playbook.  Brett Farve wouldn't try to make that throw 

[Mavric]

Just now, MyBloodIsRed16 said:

Yeah your right Knevel didn't wiff on his block and 25 wasn't giving chase to Lee.  I'm familiar with with the concept most people would call it a flood.  The only problem was Hoppes was not headed to the sideline.  I guess technically he was but he took like 3 steps.  If Lee is supposed to look Hoppes way this play needs to be struck from the playbook.  Brett Farve wouldn't try to make that throw 

 

I think you're being pretty dramatic but whatever.

 

Like I've said a couple times, this is one example out of several times that I thought he forced a throw to his first read when there were better options available.