Competition for AJMcCarron>?

[*Nately120*]

(05-18-2016, 02:32 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: But if he lost a competition to another backup that is what is best for the team keeping who is best.

Mettenburger got picked up but it appears the bengals had the same idea I did as they put in a claim

Yes, but Mettenburger was just cut in favor of Matt Cassel so meh. 

(05-18-2016, 02:36 PM)Who Dey Time Wrote: Stirring the pot thought......


Pick up Mettenberger then see if there are any willing trade partners for AJM.  If not, no harm in cutting Mettenberger.

If we wouldn't trade McCarron before I don't see how having a bum like Mettenberger on hand would change things.

[XenoMorph]

(05-18-2016, 02:37 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Yes, but Mettenburger was just cut in favor of Matt Cassel so meh. 

Not surprising and doesn't really say anything about mettenburger other than... titans drafted a QB #1 overall...  they wanted a experienced vet holding the clip board and teaching mariota.

Cassel would be a much better backup for sure

[Brownshoe]

(05-18-2016, 01:50 PM)Benton Wrote: To the bold, AJM was a rookie backup who came in towards the end of the season. In that context, he didn't look bad.

Fitz is holding out for starting salary somewhere. 

McCarron wasn't a rookie backup.

[Brownshoe]

(05-18-2016, 02:15 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: x3.

There were flaws (the offense averaged around 270 yards with him at the helm), but he did what I expect a solid backup to do. Protect the football. Well...other than the playoff game anyway. It'd be nice if we could keep him around beyond next year.

He had 3 turnovers in 4 games against mostly horrible defenses, 6 in 5 if you include the playoff game.

[wolfkaosaun]

Not sure why so many people are hating Mettenberger right now. With less weapons he's done more. Better arm and a gun-slinger.

But McCarron has more confidence and has better accuracy when it comes to shorter passes within 5-15 yards.

I mean, McCarron only had above 212 once in his 5 starts. Well, he technically didn't start the Steelers game, but I'll give it to him. If not he only has 212 as his highest in starts.

Mett had above 260 yards 3 times in his first 5 starts.

I know this may be an unpopular opinion, but I choose Mett over McCarron.

Sure, you can use the wins stats. But the Titans won 12 games in 3 years. They went 12-36 in 3 years. With and without Mett.

[Bengal Dude]

It would've been interesting to see Mett make it to us. We would've had to have carried him on the 53. He most likely would've been insurance if we ever traded AJ.

[XenoMorph]

(05-18-2016, 04:12 PM)Bengal Dude Wrote: It would've been interesting to see Mett make it to us. We would've had to have carried him on the 53. He most likely would've been insurance if we ever traded AJ.

I think he would have been solid competition to take AJs job even with AJ having 2 years* in the system

[SunsetBengal]

(05-16-2016, 06:46 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: At least 3 of those TDs came from the defense putting McCarron on the opponents side of the field. McCarron converted less than 30% of his 3rd downs, and has a lot of trouble converting downs all together. Plus he played horrible defenses, he played 30th (twice) and the 27th ranked defense against the pass.

Pretty tough on the dude, for him being thrust into his first Pro starting action, aren't you?  I realize that he had a year off, for the shoulder injury.  But, for all intents and purposes, he was a rookie, as far as professional experience goes.  And for that matter, I thought that he did better than expectations.  You can argue that he played against weaker defenses, but the only one that I'm buying on is San Francisco.  When you're playing against teams in your division, stats can go out the window, as they know your team as well as you do.

[Brownshoe]

(05-18-2016, 07:57 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Pretty tough on the dude, for him being thrust into his first Pro starting action, aren't you?  I realize that he had a year off, for the shoulder injury.  But, for all intents and purposes, he was a rookie, as far as professional experience goes.  And for that matter, I thought that he did better than expectations.  You can argue that he played against weaker defenses, but the only one that I'm buying on is San Francisco.  When you're playing against teams in your division, stats can go out the window, as they know your team as well as you do.

He still had almost two years with the playbook before he was called to play. It's not like McCarron did nothing last year when he was hurt. For him to do better than your expectations you must have and an expectation for him to be completely inept. McCarron didn't play well. He played like a mediocre backup QB. I guess Baltimore had his number even though they never played him before... I mean they had to of considering that he had 0 3rd down conversions. Maybe the 49ers had his number too since he couldn't score unless the defense put him on their side of the field, and he only had 4 3rd down conversions against them too.

[Shake n Blake]

(05-18-2016, 02:32 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: But if he lost a competition to another backup that is what is best for the team keeping who is best.

Mettenburger got picked up but it appears the bengals had the same idea I did as they put in a claim

I have no problem with Mettenburger. I actually think he'd make for an excellent backup. I'm surprised the Titans let him loose, but perhaps they wanted a veteran presence behind their young franchise QB.

(05-18-2016, 03:10 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: He had 3 turnovers in 4 games against mostly horrible defenses, 6 in 5 if you include the playoff game.

That's why I said "other than the playoff game". 3 turnovers in 4 games would equate to 12 over a full season, which is actually good. Especially for a backup. I do think Hue neutered the offense for McCarron, but still, he did an ok job with what he was asked to do.

[*Nately120*]

(05-18-2016, 03:32 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: Not sure why so many people are hating Mettenberger right now. With less weapons he's done more. Better arm and a gun-slinger.

But McCarron has more confidence and has better accuracy when it comes to shorter passes within 5-15 yards.

I mean, McCarron only had above 212 once in his 5 starts. Well, he technically didn't start the Steelers game, but I'll give it to him. If not he only has 212 as his highest in starts.

Mett had above 260 yards 3 times in his first 5 starts.

I know this may be an unpopular opinion, but I choose Mett over McCarron.

Sure, you can use the wins stats. But the Titans won 12 games in 3 years. They went 12-36 in 3 years. With and without Mett.

The issue with Mettenberger is, by my glance, only 2 of the 10 games played and went 0-10 in were even remotely close.  When your team is getting blown out you should be putting up some better looking stats, if nothing else.  3 times in 10 losses he threw for more than 250 yards.  Meh.  

The guy just seems like another of those big guys who goes late and doesn't do much.

[wolfkaosaun]

(05-18-2016, 11:36 PM)Nately120 Wrote: The issue with Mettenberger is, by my glance, only 2 of the 10 games played and went 0-10 in were even remotely close.  When your team is getting blown out you should be putting up some better looking stats, if nothing else.  3 times in 10 losses he threw for more than 250 yards.  Meh.  

The guy just seems like another of those big guys who goes late and doesn't do much.

Even in games that Mariota played in they've been blown out. The Titans just overall aren't a good team.

That's pretty much what McCarron is. He didn't really do much. Did he win us some games? Sure. Blaine Gabbert led team and Ravens missing so many starters that they were on their 4th QB on the year. And honestly, those games were won by the defense. Got 6 turnovers in those games combined.

Just I haven't seen anything from McCarron that makes me believe he's a better backup. He's more accurate in shorter yards, but Mett has a better arm. One is a game manager, the other a gun-slinger.

I honestly see no issue with bringing in competition for the backup QB position.

[Benton]

(05-18-2016, 03:07 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: McCarron wasn't a rookie backup.

Meh. I was on my phone on the treadmill. "Rookie" was easier to type than "To the bold, AJM was a backup who had never started in an NFL game or had any significant playing time out of preseason and came in towards the end of the season. In that context, he didn't look bad."

But, yeah, he wasn't a rookie. Just a backup who had never started in an NFL game or had any significant playing time out of preseason.

[BengalChris]

(05-18-2016, 03:07 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: McCarron wasn't a rookie backup.

Technically,  but he spent most of his rookie year on the PuP list, so couldn't even practice until late in that year. He also didn't do any worse than any recent Bengals QB did in their first or even second playoff games, so I wouldn't be too hard on him.

[McC]

(05-19-2016, 03:39 PM)Benton Wrote: Meh. I was on my phone on the treadmill. "Rookie" was easier to type than "To the bold, AJM was a backup who had never started in an NFL game or had any significant playing time out of preseason and came in towards the end of the season. In that context, he didn't look bad."

But, yeah, he wasn't a rookie. Just a backup who had never started in an NFL game or had any significant playing time out of preseason.

Studying the play book and having the big guys actually coming at you are definitely two different things.

The Niners had a bad defense but they were much better at home too.

Also, to further your point, AJM kinda had that playoff game won after a 4th quarter comeback.

[Brownshoe]

(05-19-2016, 07:49 PM)McC Wrote: Studying the play book and having the big guys actually coming at you are definitely two different things.

The Niners had a bad defense but they were much better at home too.

Also, to further your point, AJM kinda had that playoff game won after a 4th quarter comeback.

You mean the defense? McCarron didn't do nearly enough to win. The defense is the only reason why we were even close to winning. If the defense didn't play lights out then it would have been a blowout of epic proportion.

[*Nately120*]

(05-19-2016, 03:00 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: Even in games that Mariota played in they've been blown out. The Titans just overall aren't a good team.

That's pretty much what McCarron is. He didn't really do much. Did he win us some games? Sure. Blaine Gabbert led team and Ravens missing so many starters that they were on their 4th QB on the year. And honestly, those games were won by the defense. Got 6 turnovers in those games combined.

Just I haven't seen anything from McCarron that makes me believe he's a better backup. He's more accurate in shorter yards, but Mett has a better arm. One is a game manager, the other a gun-slinger.

I honestly see no issue with bringing in competition for the backup QB position.

I don't see a big issue with it, but I don't see enough in Mettenberger to make me want to take snaps from McCarron.  I'll admit I'm outwardly anti-Mettenberger at this point (plus he's been signed, so what's the point?) but something about 6th round gunslingers make me say no thanks.

(05-19-2016, 08:43 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: You mean the defense? McCarron didn't do nearly enough to win. The defense is the only reason why we were even close to winning. If the defense didn't play lights out then it would have been a blowout of epic proportion.

Are you saying McCarron inspired the defense to finally show up in the playoffs the way Dalton never could?

[McC]

(05-19-2016, 08:43 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: You mean the defense? McCarron didn't do nearly enough to win. The defense is the only reason why we were even close to winning. If the defense didn't play lights out then it would have been a blowout of epic proportion.

Pretty sure nobody's taking anything away from the defense.  When it was money time, he came through.  The fourth quarter is where legacies are  made and he delivered.

As I understand it, it is the defense's job to keep points off the board, although they weren't too successful on the Steelers' winning drive.

AJ walked off the field at about the two minute warning with the lead.  I call that doing enough to win.  If you can't, then that's you with some weird thing against him.

[Shake n Blake]

(05-19-2016, 11:10 PM)McC Wrote: Pretty sure nobody's taking anything away from the defense.  When it was money time, he came through.  The fourth quarter is where legacies are  made and he delivered.

As I understand it, it is the defense's job to keep points off the board, although they weren't too successful on the Steelers' winning drive.

AJ walked off the field at about the two minute warning with the lead.  I call that doing enough to win.  If you can't, then that's you with some weird thing against him.

Well in fairness, how many times has Dalton ever had the opportunity to be the 4th quarter hero? Other than Texans 2.0, we were always down multiple scores in the 4th. 

I remember a lot of people blaming the poor defensive efforts on Dalton's turnovers, yet our D seemed to handle multiple turnovers from McCarron just fine. 

I know you didn't really mention Dalton, but I just don't think he's had many chances to play hero after multiple turnovers like McCarron did. So is a great defensive performance the difference between a QB being a choke artist and being a (almost) hero? Sure seems like it.

If the D allowed 180 rush yards and 28 points, no one would be talking about McCarron having a good 4th quarter. They'd be talking about the INT, 3 fumbles and 68.3 rating. The 18 points scored against an awful defense.

[Brownshoe]

(05-19-2016, 11:10 PM)McC Wrote: Pretty sure nobody's taking anything away from the defense.  When it was money time, he came through.  The fourth quarter is where legacies are  made and he delivered.

As I understand it, it is the defense's job to keep points off the board, although they weren't too successful on the Steelers' winning drive.

AJ walked off the field at about the two minute warning with the lead.  I call that doing enough to win.  If you can't, then that's you with some weird thing against him.

McCarron couldn't score any points until big Ben went down and the defense gave us amazing field position (both TDs we started on the Steelers side of the field, and one of which came from a huge PI call). The only reason we came back, or McCarron got any TDs was because the defense put him in a good position to. McCarron played pretty dreadful in that game.