Herbert vs His Peers

[Steve]

Running out of some stupid desire to be balanced when that is not where the team's talent is focused is just stupid as an approach. That is idiotic Anthony Lynn football at its finest. All 32 teams passed the ball more than they ran it 2021.

Running the ball is sometimes about trying to keep the pass rush in check. Only morons think it is a good idea to let the pass rushers get into their sprinter's stance, explode upfield and get after the QB.

It also is handy to wear down the pass rushers, and tire their legs. Pass rushers only have so many good explosive snaps in them over the course of a game, and if they have to use them up playing the run, then those plays make it easier to protect the QB after the DL wears down.

[Guest]

Running the ball is sometimes about trying to keep the pass rush in check. Only morons think it is a good idea to let the pass rushers get into their sprinter's stance, explode upfield and get after the QB.

It also is handy to wear down the pass rushers, and tire their legs. Pass rushers only have so many good explosive snaps in them over the course of a game, and if they have to use them up playing the run, then those plays make it easier to protect the QB after the DL wears down.

Nobody is saying that we should never run the ball. 672 passes for Herbert were made for an offense that only passed the ball 62.5% of the time, which was about 4% less than the NFL leader. Although we were ranked 5th in terms of passing percentage, we were closer to the percentage of the 20th ranked team than we were to the first ranked team. So, not only am I not troubled by our pass percentage, I would prefer it to be about 4% or so higher (about a 2 to 1 split between pass and run). Just as Tony Romo stated, we want Herbert to have about two chances to pick up a first down for us for every running play called. That would put Herbert at about 717 passes for a 17 game game season based upon the total number of plays we ran this past season.

Also, I prefer RB screens as a means of discouraging pass rushers. After rushing, they can then go and try to chase the play form behind.

In terms of running plays to frustrate edge rushers, I like draws run under an edge rusher that has been invited/forced too far up the field.

The pass is used to set up the run (not the other way around), which is used to frustrate defenders.

[DerwinBosa]

Nobody has ever indicated that we should not try to have better players at every position. Teams always try to improve at every position. So that is a non-issue.

I have already proven that your thinking that teams that pass the ball cannot have offensive success is incorrect. Teams with elite QBs throw the ball a lot because they have elite QBs. That is why 3 of the top 6 passing teams were also top 5 scoring teams.

I specifically wanted us to draft Taylor in round 2 of the 2020 NFL draft. And if we had Taylor, I would want still want us to put the ball in Justin Herbert's hands as he is arguably the best QB in the NFL going forward as of right now.

Your takes as to specific losses are BS. They really deserve to be ignored as they are that bad. However...

We lost to DAL because we missed a FG and had two TDs called back on penalties that we did not end up getting. Since those drives netted 3 points instead of the 17 that should have happened, we lost 20-17 instead of winning 31-20.

Against DEN, apart from Herbert scrambles, we averaged a whopping 2.8 yards per carry, so that was not the answer. The passing game was working, but we had a pass resulting in a first down at the DEN 6 called back due to a penalty against Linsley, which set up a 3rd and 14 and an INT by Herbert in the end zone. And Ekeler dropped a pass into a pick 6. Add in a missed FG and the game changes from a likely hard fought 23-21 victory against a divisional opponent into a 28-13 loss.

Against the Raiders, of course, we had zero chance at all without Herbert and the passing game and, in fact, probably win that game if we had passed the ball on 3rd and 1 or 4th and 1 from deep in our own end instead of failing with stupid running plays. Of course, we also could have gone for two with Herbert passing the ball after Herbert put the team on his back and led two brilliant TD drives down the stretch and won the game that way. And we could have won the game by winning a stupid coin toss.

Against BAL, the whole team played poorly, so it probably did not matter what we did in that game, but beating the blitz over the top with Guyton for TDs multiple times seemed like a promising option instead of attempting two yard passes against bump and run coverage to Josh Palmer. 10 RB carries for 14 yards strongly suggests that running the ball was not the answer. BAL did have the #32 ranked pass defense and the #1 ranked run defense, so yeah, running the ball a lot against them makes sense (full sarcasm intended). SMH....

The Los Angeles Rams ran the ball the 23 times for 43 yards in the Super Bowl win last week. Just because it isn't working the way you would like doesn't mean you stop doing it. Becoming one-dimensional often leads to disaster, as was shown particularly against Denver and New England.

You're full of it by saying we had no chance without Herbert and the passing game against the Raiders. We ran all over the Raiders in our previous win over them, and in the final game Ekeler had 64 yards on 16 carries and Justin Jackson got three carries for 20 yards. Maxx Crosby was making Herbert run for his life. We went three-and-out on our first drive, all Herbert passes. We scored a touchdown on our second drive, with nine passes and seven rushes. The next drive we scored a touchdown, with six runs and six passes. In the middle of the third quarter we had a second-and-three after a seven-yard Ekeler run. Herbert threw an incomplete pass and then was sacked, causing us to punt. The Raiders then went on a long scoring drive into the fourth quarter to go up 26-14. On second-and-three, down 20-14, you run the ball.

The Dallas Cowboys game would have been a lot different if we had run the ball more. Ekeler and Jackson combined for 75 yards on only 13 carries. Herbert was throwing the ball well, but he was running for his life from Micah Parsons and threw two interceptions.

These elite quarterbacks you speak of have won their Super Bowls with balanced offenses. I already brought up Tom Brady's 2018 postseason run. He had others where his offense ran it just as much or more than it threw. Even when Peyton Manning threw for 55 touchdown passes in 2013, the Broncos ran the ball 33 times against us in the Divisional Round and 28 times against the Patriots in the AFC Championship Game. When the games are at their most crucial, teams with even the greatest quarterbacks of all time do not want their offenses to have 64 pass attempts and 19 rushes.

[DerwinBosa]

It is always better to be more physically talented as a QB than not.

You have raised examples in which other, less physically talented QBs have had success. Nobody is saying that cannot happen, but those are in the small minority of cases. So, when you raise Tom Brady as an example, it is the same kind of argument as saying that a 6th round pick can be better than a first round pick. Yes, that can happen, but first round picks are better the vast majority of the time as are more physically gifted QBs.

In your analysis, you are assuming that Burrow, a clearly less physically gifted QB, has what Montana and Brady had in terms of other abilities that would compensate for a lack of physical gifts. That has not been established and represents poor argumentation. Just because a less physical gifted player can succeed in isolated instances does not mean that every less physically gifted QB will succeed.

Moreover, looking at the issue from the side of the more physically gifted player, there are often clear weaknesses also in play that served to compromise those players. Elway had a very strong arm, but he was not a very accurate passer. Jeff George was a head case that often had conflict with coaches and management. Jay Cutler was known for having a bad attitude. Herbert displays none of these or other weaknesses.

As for my comparisons between Herbert and Burrow and Herbert and Mahomes, those are two very different comparisons. Herbert and Mahomes are far more similar than Herbert and Burrow.

In my comparison between Herbert and Mahomes, what I am saying is that between two physically gifted QBs, it is Herbert that has the higher ceiling, is on the upswing, and has already fully matched Mahomes' performance. Going forward, I reasonably expect Herbert to be better than Mahomes. That said, the margin between the two is fairly small because both are physically gifted players with Herbert being slightly more physically gifted.

In my comparison between Herbert and Burrow, I am saying that Herbert's physical advantages over Burrow are pronounced. Herbert can make plays all the time all over the place that Burrow cannot. I think Burrow probably is a very slightly more accurate passer than Herbert on the whole, but that that is nowhere close to being enough to offset Herbert's physical advantages.

I suspect Herbert would be better than Burrow in any NFL offense anywhere and that if both played for the same team, no matter which team, Burrow would be Herbert's backup.

This is all a bunch of crap. I said there was a lot more to playing the quarterback position than being the most gifted physically. You're making it out like Justin Herbert has everything and Joe Burrow is Chad Pennington, neither of which is true.

Four of the greatest quarterbacks of all time (Montana, Unitas, Brady, Peyton Manning) are examples of those who didn't have cannons or Michael Vick's speed, which Herbert doesn't possess in his running ability. To lesser extents Philip Rivers, Steve Young (who didn't have a cannon), Ben Roethlisberger, Drew Brees, and plenty of other quarterbacks are examples of those who lacked in certain areas but were still among the best at the position.

[dmac_bolt]

They were going to lose regardless, but having Mahomes dropping back to pass and running for his life all game was one of the dumbest approaches I've ever seen.

It was dumb. If they ran it 50 times, they would have lost. They were doomed. An OL that can’t pass block has a very high probability of not being able to dominate a rush-only game strategy.

[dmac_bolt]

The Los Angeles Rams ran the ball the 23 times for 43 yards in the Super Bowl win last week. Just because it isn't working the way you would like doesn't mean you stop doing it. Becoming one-dimensional often leads to disaster, as was shown particularly against Denver and New England.

You're full of it by saying we had no chance without Herbert and the passing game against the Raiders. We ran all over the Raiders in our previous win over them, and in the final game Ekeler had 64 yards on 16 carries and Justin Jackson got three carries for 20 yards. Maxx Crosby was making Herbert run for his life. We went three-and-out on our first drive, all Herbert passes. We scored a touchdown on our second drive, with nine passes and seven rushes. The next drive we scored a touchdown, with six runs and six passes. In the middle of the third quarter we had a second-and-three after a seven-yard Ekeler run. Herbert threw an incomplete pass and then was sacked, causing us to punt. The Raiders then went on a long scoring drive into the fourth quarter to go up 26-14. On second-and-three, down 20-14, you run the ball.

The Dallas Cowboys game would have been a lot different if we had run the ball more. Ekeler and Jackson combined for 75 yards on only 13 carries. Herbert was throwing the ball well, but he was running for his life from Micah Parsons and threw two interceptions.

These elite quarterbacks you speak of have won their Super Bowls with balanced offenses. I already brought up Tom Brady's 2018 postseason run. He had others where his offense ran it just as much or more than it threw. Even when Peyton Manning threw for 55 touchdown passes in 2013, the Broncos ran the ball 33 times against us in the Divisional Round and 28 times against the Patriots in the AFC Championship Game. When the games are at their most crucial, teams with even the greatest quarterbacks of all time do not want their offenses to have 64 pass attempts and 19 rushes.

LAR SB is not a good example of why a team should run. Their offense was shitty in the SB, managing to score a humble 23 points, even though their defense was busy completely stifling the opponent. Their defense won the game, period.

2 yards a carry sucks. They didn’t get that. Most of their run plays were wasted plays, a lot of them lost yards. btw - i don’t get why this is an argument here anyway so I’ll back out. I want LAC to be able to run and pass both.

add: I’ll argue their best drive of the game was the last drive, where they abandoned the run.

[Guest]

The Los Angeles Rams ran the ball the 23 times for 43 yards in the Super Bowl win last week. Just because it isn't working the way you would like doesn't mean you stop doing it. Becoming one-dimensional often leads to disaster, as was shown particularly against Denver and New England.

You're full of it by saying we had no chance without Herbert and the passing game against the Raiders. We ran all over the Raiders in our previous win over them, and in the final game Ekeler had 64 yards on 16 carries and Justin Jackson got three carries for 20 yards. Maxx Crosby was making Herbert run for his life. We went three-and-out on our first drive, all Herbert passes. We scored a touchdown on our second drive, with nine passes and seven rushes. The next drive we scored a touchdown, with six runs and six passes. In the middle of the third quarter we had a second-and-three after a seven-yard Ekeler run. Herbert threw an incomplete pass and then was sacked, causing us to punt. The Raiders then went on a long scoring drive into the fourth quarter to go up 26-14. On second-and-three, down 20-14, you run the ball.

The Dallas Cowboys game would have been a lot different if we had run the ball more. Ekeler and Jackson combined for 75 yards on only 13 carries. Herbert was throwing the ball well, but he was running for his life from Micah Parsons and threw two interceptions.

These elite quarterbacks you speak of have won their Super Bowls with balanced offenses. I already brought up Tom Brady's 2018 postseason run. He had others where his offense ran it just as much or more than it threw. Even when Peyton Manning threw for 55 touchdown passes in 2013, the Broncos ran the ball 33 times against us in the Divisional Round and 28 times against the Patriots in the AFC Championship Game. When the games are at their most crucial, teams with even the greatest quarterbacks of all time do not want their offenses to have 64 pass attempts and 19 rushes.

Your take on the second LV game is absolute BS.

Against the Raiders, being one-dimensional is actually what temporarily saved us. We were running the ball at a higher percentage than we usually did and it was not working. This included the stupid back to back failed 3rd and 4th down and 1 running plays from deep in our own end. We scored 14 points in the first 51:37 seconds before we began going exclusively with the pass and we then scored 15 points from the beginning of our first all passing drive with only 8:23 left and another 3 in OT. And, our OT drive was the only drive stopped on our final three possessions and it was stopped on the only series of downs...wait for it...on which we tried a running play and took a passing opportunity away from Herbert. Your suggestion that we could have run the ball more is just absurd in light of what actually happened in that game.

Your take on the DAL game is also ridiculous. The air attack worked very well, but we had two passing TDs called back and we missed a FG. We should have had 31 against DAL by doing exactly what we did. Why would I want to run more and burn clock? We have Herbert. I want more possessions per team, not fewer possessions, which should give our team a chance to pull away over time.

Again, 3 of the top 6 pass percentage teams were in the top 5 in scoring. They deliberately threw more because they have elite QBs and it worked well for them.

Isolated one game examples of what other teams did are absolutely meaningless. However, the 2013 Broncos were 10 times as good as we were. We could not stop the pass or the run, so shortening the game was stupidity on their part. We were a blown 3rd and 17 on defense from getting the ball back with three minutes to go with a chance to tie the game when that Bronco team should have killed us. So, I would say their ground game helped us a lot by taking the ball out of Manning's hands. And against NE, Manning threw the ball 43 times for 400 yards. Do you think the story was DEN's 3.8 YPC for 107 yards on the ground or Manning's 400 passing yards while DEN passed the ball well over 60% of the time? I do not wish to mean, but your analysis is lame.

Finally, the Rams ran the ball 23 times for 43 yards and they screwed themselves over offensively because of it. McVay called a horrible game and was on the verge of losing the Super Bowl until he finally put the ball in Stafford's hands.

[DerwinBosa]

It was dumb. If they ran it 50 times, they would have lost. They were doomed. An OL that can’t pass block has a very high probability of not being able to dominate a rush-only game strategy.

LOL. Ugh. It's stupid if you run or pass it 50 times. That is why, as stated numerous times here, it is best to have a a balanced offense. And it's easier to run-block than to protect the passer. That's what commentators, often former offensive linemen, say when offenses are running the ball, "This is what the guys up front love to do."

[Boltjolt]

A lot is being said in the media about how great Burrow is playing.
I decided to do some number comparisons of Burrow vs Herbert vs the playoff bound teams they played this season.
Both Herbert and Burrow played 9 teams that made the playoffs.
(This includes the 3 playoff games of Bengals, and yes, that means in the regular season, Bengals played 3 playoff bound teams fewer than the Chargers.)

The Burrow lead Bengals averaged 27.6 points per game on offense vs playoff bound teams.
The Herbert led Chargers averaged 29.8 points per game on offense vs playoff bound teams.

In those same games...
The Bengals defense allowed 19.3 points per game.
The Chargers defense allowed 26.3 points per game.

Conclusion from this rather simplistic statistical comparison:
Burrow did a great job, 27.6 points per game vs elite competition is great, but it's the defense that carried them, 19.3 points allowed is spectacular vs elite teams.
Herbert did an even better job than Burrow, 2.2 points per game better vs elite competition, but the Charger defense let him down, 26.3 is not good, not by any means.

EDIT, there was a typo in the original numbers. Fixed
--

Moderator edit... topic changed to include all other QB peers.

Who cares, they are both good QBs. Fact is if both were on the board at our pick, id have taken Burrow and most here would of too. However, he wasnt available and has been much better than i anticipated he would be right out of the gate, and im stoked he is our QB.

Ive not a cross word to say about Burrow and he certainly looks like he will be a stud QB in this league and no need for us to compare them. We never had a shot at him anyways.

Now talkin Tua.....i am soooooooo glad Miami screwed the pooch on that one!

[DerwinBosa]

Your take on the second LV game is absolute BS.

Against the Raiders, being one-dimensional is actually what temporarily saved us. We were running the ball at a higher percentage than we usually did and it was not working. This included the stupid back to back failed 3rd and 4th down and 1 running plays from deep in our own end. We scored 14 points in the first 51:37 seconds before we began going exclusively with the pass and we then scored 15 points from the beginning of our first all passing drive with only 8:23 left and another 3 in OT. And, our OT drive was the only drive stopped on our final three possessions and it was stopped on the only series of downs...wait for it...on which we tried a running play and took a passing opportunity away from Herbert. Your suggestion that we could have run the ball more is just absurd in light of what actually happened in that game.

Your take on the DAL game is also ridiculous. The air attack worked very well, but we had two passing TDs called back and we missed a FG. We should have had 31 against DAL by doing exactly what we did. Why would I want to run more and burn clock? We have Herbert. I want more possessions per team, not fewer possessions, which should give our team a chance to pull away over time.

Again, 3 of the top 6 pass percentage teams were in the top 5 in scoring. They deliberately threw more because they have elite QBs and it worked well for them.

Isolated one game examples of what other teams did are absolutely meaningless. However, the 2013 Broncos were 10 times as good as we were. We could not stop the pass or the run, so shortening the game was stupidity on their part. We were a blown 3rd and 17 on defense from getting the ball back with three minutes to go with a chance to tie the game when that Bronco team should have killed us. So, I would say their ground game helped us a lot by taking the ball out of Manning's hands. And against NE, Manning threw the ball 43 times for 400 yards. Do you think the story was DEN's 3.8 YPC for 107 yards on the ground or Manning's 400 passing yards while DEN passed the ball well over 60% of the time? I do not wish to mean, but your analysis is lame.

Finally, the Rams ran the ball 23 times for 43 yards and they screwed themselves over offensively because of it. McVay called a horrible game and was on the verge of losing the Super Bowl until he finally put the ball in Stafford's hands.

How was it not working against the Raiders? Ekeler and Jackson ran the ball a total of 19 times for 84 yards in the game. We went three-and-out on our first drive, with three Herbert passes. We had a second-and-three in the third quarter. Herbert threw incomplete and got sacked. Early in the fourth quarter Herbert threw an interception. How did the running game, which averaged about 4.5 yards a carry, not work and cause us to fall behind? You're ridiculous.The reality is Herbert didn't perform well until the fourth quarter. I know it's hard to believe, but even the greatest quarterbacks of all time have had stretches in games where they've struggled.

The Dallas game should have been won convincingly without excuses. And you want to run and burn more clock because your defense isn't good and is getting worn out by Dallas's offense. What good is Herbert dropping back to pass over 40 times if the line isn't protecting him well and he throws two interceptions while the offense scores only 17 points?

The Rams ran the ball 23 times because you need balance to keep the opposing defense honest, something you clearly don't understand. Especially given how unpredictable Matthew Stafford was throughout the season, as evidenced with him almost throwing the game away against the 49ers in the NFC Championship. McVay, unlike you, realized how putting the ball in the air too often leads to back-breaking mistakes. That's why he's a Super Bowl-winning coach and you're on a message board placing more importance on Justin Herbert being considered the best quarterback than the Chargers winning a Super Bowl.

[DerwinBosa]

Isolated one game examples of what other teams did are absolutely meaningless. However, the 2013 Broncos were 10 times as good as we were. We could not stop the pass or the run, so shortening the game was stupidity on their part. We were a blown 3rd and 17 on defense from getting the ball back with three minutes to go with a chance to tie the game when that Bronco team should have killed us. So, I would say their ground game helped us a lot by taking the ball out of Manning's hands. And against NE, Manning threw the ball 43 times for 400 yards. Do you think the story was DEN's 3.8 YPC for 107 yards on the ground or Manning's 400 passing yards while DEN passed the ball well over 60% of the time? I do not wish to mean, but your analysis is lame.

Running the ball 33 times against us and 28 against New England did them a lot better than throwing it 49 times and running it 14 in the Super Bowl disaster against Seattle. Also, Peyton won his first Super Bowl, over the Bears, when the Colts ran 42 times and he threw 38, when he was in the prime of his career. But I'm sure you thought that was a mistake and kept the Bears in the game.

[Guest]

This is all a bunch of crap. I said there was a lot more to playing the quarterback position than being the most gifted physically. You're making it out like Justin Herbert has everything and Joe Burrow is Chad Pennington, neither of which is true.

Four of the greatest quarterbacks of all time (Montana, Unitas, Brady, Peyton Manning) are examples of those who didn't have cannons or Michael Vick's speed, which Herbert doesn't possess in his running ability. To lesser extents Philip Rivers, Steve Young (who didn't have a cannon), Ben Roethlisberger, Drew Brees, and plenty of other quarterbacks are examples of those who lacked in certain areas but were still among the best at the position.

Actually, Chad Pennington before his shoulder injuries is the single closest player comparison to Joe Burrow that I have seen. Pennington was known for his accuracy, but not known for having a strong arm, just like Burrow. Both are/were very similar in mobility (very small edge to Pennington). It was only after Pennington's shoulder injuries that he was known for having a very weak arm. And Pennington was first round pick in his own right that had early success in his NFL career.

Further, you keep missing what I am saying. I have never suggested that being superior physically is everything. What I have said is that it is desirable and clearly means something. I keep saying that and you keep missing that I have said nothing else the entire time. As between having superior physical traits and not having those traits, having superior physical traits is more desirable.

Finally, your player examples are awful. Steve Young ran a 4.55 in the 40. That is elite running ability for a QB. Roethlisberger ran a 4.75 40 and had a fairly strong arm. Roethlisberger was faster than Mahomes and within a few hundredths of a second in 40 time of Herbert and Allen. So, your effort to steal two great players that fit into the physically gifted category fails.