+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-2.html)
+--- Thread: Driskel should be starter next year (/thread-18405.html)
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Murdock2420 - 12-16-2018
(12-16-2018, 09:39 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote:
He was over throwing high all day. That is my issue, missing wide open guys by 10 yards is not good. I love his athleticism, hate his accuracy!
Accuracy and mechanics can be taught and fixed though, athleticism can not. The times the play would break down and he went for positive yards or first downs was a nice change from Dalton's run sideways and through the ball over the bench. I'd like to see what the next two weeks hold for him with the Browns and *%#!'s left on the schedule.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - The Real Deal - 12-16-2018
Maybe we can find a couple 10 ft tall wr’s that have 60 inch verticals. O Driskel accuracy problem solved.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - BengalsBong - 12-16-2018
He was throwing to the right WR target all day pretty much just missing the throws. But giving Dalton the job year after year and not having any competition at all for the job is how we got in this boat to begin with. If you don't make your QB fight for their job you don't know how good your starter is or how good your back ups are. I still do like Driskel just worried about his arm he would be much improved with an off season with House or some other QB trainers.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - fredtoast - 12-17-2018
(12-16-2018, 10:28 PM)BengalsBong Wrote: If you don't make your QB fight for their job you don't know how good your starter is or how good your back ups are.
Sure you do.
Dalton is a solid starting NFL QB and Driskel stinks.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - BengalsRocker - 12-17-2018
(12-16-2018, 10:15 PM)The Real Deal Wrote: Maybe we can find a couple 10 ft tall wr’s that have 60 inch verticals. O Driskel accuracy problem solved.
I was thinking Human Centipeding Tate and Core might be a start.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Fan_in_Kettering - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 12:28 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Sure you do.
Dalton is a solid starting NFL QB and Driskel stinks.
People may not like to hear this but it’s the truth.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - fredtoast - 12-17-2018
(12-16-2018, 08:21 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I think Lazor needs to realize Driskell is not Andy. Seemed easy enough for Baltimore to realize Jackson is not Flacco.
It is also easy to see that Driskel is not Jackson. Just like Terrell Pryor and hundreds of other great atyhletes who played QB are not jackson.
Maybe you should look closer.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - bfine32 - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 12:32 AM)fredtoast Wrote: It is also easy to see that Driskel is not Jackson. Just like Terrell Pryor and hundreds of other great atyhletes who played QB are not jackson.
Maybe you should look closer.
Not sure what that has to do with what I said.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - wolverine515151 - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 12:28 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Sure you do.
Dalton is a solid starting NFL QB and Driskel stinks.
What an absolute garbage statement, unfounded and full of bias. Driskel has a 80 qb rating this year without Green or Eifert, Dalton has a 74 qb rating without Green or Eifert.
Driskel is bigger, has a stronger arm, and is significantly faster than Dalton. How does that equate to Dalton being solid and Driskel being garbage? Answer, Driskel is better than Dalton with the same weapons.
You can start making things up to fit your delusional view of Driskel, but the facts back up my statements.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Nicomo Cosca - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 05:39 AM)wolverine515151 Wrote: What an absolute garbage statement, unfounded and full of bias. Driskel has a 90 qb rating this year without Green or Eifert, Dalton has a 74 qb rating without Green or Eifert.
Driskel is bigger, has a stronger arm, and is significantly faster than Dalton. How does that equate to Dalton being solid and Driskel being garbage? Answer, Driskel is better than Dalton with the same weapons that Dalton had.
You can start making things up to fit your delusional view of Driskel, but the facts back up my statements.
Driskel’s accuracy is terrible. Did you watch the game yesterday?
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - wolverine515151 - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 05:47 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Driskel’s accuracy is terrible. Did you watch the game yesterday?
He wasn't significantly bad, and one game doesn't mean you can label a player as garbage. The fact is Dalton would have been as bad or worse than Driskel in yesterdays game.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Nicomo Cosca - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 05:49 AM)wolverine515151 Wrote: He wasn't significantly bad, and one game doesn't mean you can label a player as garbage. The fact is Dalton would have been as bad or worse than Driskel in yesterdays game.
14/33 for only 130 yds 51.3 PR isn’t significantly bad?
And when he was missing he was missing big. Like I said, terrible accuracy. The game plan needs to involve his legs and athleticism more. That’s what got him to the NFL.
He’s not a better passer than Dalton.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - wolverine515151 - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 05:58 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: 14/33 for only 130 yds 51.3 PR isn’t significantly bad?
And when he was missing he was missing big. Like I said, terrible accuracy. The game plan needs to involve his legs and athleticism more. That’s what got him to the NFL.
He’s not a better passer than Dalton.
Some of those throws were because players were covered and he was throwing the ball away. It was his worst game this year and we still won because he managed the game well enough to get the win. I'll say it again, one game isn't enough to label a player as garbage or a hof.
He has a better qb rating than Dalton with the same weapons, whether you believe that or not is irrelevant, the stats backs up my statement.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Nicomo Cosca - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 06:04 AM)wolverine515151 Wrote: Some of those throws were because players were covered and he was throwing the ball away. It was his worst game this year and we still won because he managed the game well enough to get the win. I'll say it again, one game isn't enough to label a player as garbage or a hof.
He has a better qb rating than Dalton with the same weapons, whether you believe that or not is irrelevant, the stats backs up my statement.
So one game is not enough to make a determination but 3 games is enough to declare him better than Dalton?
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - wolverine515151 - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 06:07 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: So one game is not enough to make a determination but 3 games is enough to declare him better than Dalton?
He's played 4 games as a starter and had 1 below average game, and 3 solid games, that one game is not enough to declare him much worse than Dalton.
3 > 1 in case you don't know that. Even in the one bad game, some of that could have been due to scheme and players not getting open.
I know watching the game that some of those throw were purposely thrown away because some players were not open, or they were thrown to a spot where only the receiver could make a play on the ball and no one else.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Nicomo Cosca - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 06:13 AM)wolverine515151 Wrote: He's played 4 games as a starter and had 1 below average game, and 3 solid games, that one game is not enough to declare him much worse than Dalton.
3 > 1 in case you don't know that. Even in the one bad game, some of that could have been due to scheme and players not getting open.
I know watching the game that some of those throw were purposely thrown away because some players were not open, or they were thrown to a spot where only the receiver could make a play on the ball and no one else.
He’s thrown for over 200 yds once in his 4 starts (and never more than 1 TD). Missing AJ or not, that’s extremely mediocre in the modern pass happy NFL. He has Lamar Jackson type passing numbers, but without the big running plays. He’s not very good.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - WiregrassBenGal - 12-17-2018
They should have given Jeff a TD last week for that 10 yard run he did. He also got at least one difficult first down yesterday for some running he did. Yes, he missed some throws yesterday but had some really good ones, too. He is at least good enough to challenge Andy and is definitely keep-able for next year.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - Big Boss - 12-17-2018
Driskel is not an NFL-caliber QB capable of taking us to the playoffs, and any claim to the contrary is absurd. I get that some people are sick of Dalton and want to move on from him, but don't let that cloud your judgment. Take the shades off and open your eyes.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - KillerGoose - 12-17-2018
(12-17-2018, 06:13 AM)wolverine515151 Wrote: He's played 4 games as a starter and had 1 below average game, and 3 solid games, that one game is not enough to declare him much worse than Dalton.
3 > 1 in case you don't know that. Even in the one bad game, some of that could have been due to scheme and players not getting open.
I know watching the game that some of those throw were purposely thrown away because some players were not open, or they were thrown to a spot where only the receiver could make a play on the ball and no one else.
He has had 1 miserable game, two bad games and one mediocre game.
Driskel is not a good QB. Dalton is better than him in nearly every single facet of the game, and he is significantly better at that.
It is time to move on from Dalton. It will never be time to move on to Driskel because he flat out sucks.
RE: Driskel should be starter next year - spidey - 12-17-2018
Watching Driskel made me wish we had John Kitna back....