The Michael McCorkle "Mac" Jones Thread

[Dogman]

That's not self-policing. That's you saying YOU don't like the conversation and YOU don't wish to read it. Nobody is forcing you to read it. You can scroll right on by. Moreover, it is a handful of posts of the hundreds of replies.

Their conversation is respectful and adheres to board standards while actually discussing something with content and context.

Please don't police threads like this.

 

[SMU_Sox]

I feel like the pizza party gif - you know the one where the guy is bringing pizza to the party but the party is on fire?

Honestly the box score numbers are interesting but I don’t know how much they help.

https://x.com/kevincole___/status/1709943368560861495?s=46&t=kvYWuq6n2wZg-KCGv0fpWg

This is from PFF and it’s subjective but it has Mac leading the NFL with interception worthy throws. Personally I had 12 not 14 but YMMV and it’s bad. He’s not seeing the field well. And this whole thing on JTO liking or not liking Mac is a wrong. He actually wasn’t the biggest fan of Mac’s game going into the draft. He wants everyone to succeed though (kind of like me with all the guys I watch). It’s just bad. The conditions were atrocious during the Jets game so he got somewhat of a pass from me but his Jets game was not great. Specifically though the second half. Since that second half he’s been a bit of a train wreck. He will probably rebound but is that good enough? He has this panic in him. His footwork has not been fixed and is deteriorating. You’d hope by year 3 even with shit support he would look a little better and he just hasn’t. I mean he had some good moments weeks 1-2. You saw some good throws then.

Friends of Bill all have their knives out right now. I think Mac is the QB for the rest of the year but I am skeptical he will be in play for 2024. You can’t have this many bad throws when you aren’t an elite playmaker and even then…

I had such good feels from him weeks 1-2 and even parts of week 3. Hope he bounces back but not sure he can ever eliminate this type of play from his game. He’s not good enough in other areas to make up for it.

 

[rodderick]

I feel like the pizza party gif - you know the one where the guy is bringing pizza to the party but the party is on fire?

Honestly the box score numbers are interesting but I don’t know how much they help.

https://x.com/kevincole___/status/1709943368560861495?s=46&t=kvYWuq6n2wZg-KCGv0fpWg

This is from PFF and it’s subjective but it has Mac leading the NFL with interception worthy throws. Personally I had 12 not 14 but YMMV and it’s bad. He’s not seeing the field well. And this whole thing on JTO liking or not liking Mac is a wrong. He actually wasn’t the biggest fan of Mac’s game going into the draft. He wants everyone to succeed though (kind of like me with all the guys I watch). It’s just bad. The conditions were atrocious during the Jets game so he got somewhat of a pass from me but his Jets game was not great. Specifically though the second half. Since that second half he’s been a bit of a train wreck. He will probably rebound but is that good enough? He has this panic in him. His footwork has not been fixed and is deteriorating. You’d hope by year 3 even with shit support he would look a little better and he just hasn’t. I mean he had some good moments weeks 1-2. You saw some good throws then.

Friends of Bill all have their knives out right now. I think Mac is the QB for the rest of the year but I am skeptical he will be in play for 2024. You can’t have this many bad throws when you aren’t an elite playmaker and even then…

I had such good feels from him weeks 1-2 and even parts of week 3. Hope he bounces back but not sure he can ever eliminate this type of play from his game. He’s not good enough in other areas to make up for it.

I think this is from FTN, the guys who are now behind DVOA after the whole Football Outsiders ordeal. PFF has him at 10 turnover worthy plays, if I'm not mistaken.

 

[Dogman]

Do turnover worthy plays include plays where he did turn the ball over? Regardless, 10 in 4 games is lousy. By that average, he will have 40+ on the season. I'm guessing that would translate to 20+ INTs. That's nowhere close to good.

 

[rodderick]

Do turnover worthy plays include plays where he did turn the ball over? Regardless, 10 in 4 games is lousy. By that average, he will have 40+ on the season. I'm guessing that would translate to 20+ INTs. That's not close good.

Yes they do.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

Do turnover worthy plays include plays where he did turn the ball over? Regardless, 10 in 4 games is lousy. By that average, he will have 40+ on the season. I'm guessing that would translate to 20+ INTs. That's nowhere close to good.

Yeah, for a QB that's terrible, given that other players make turnovers too.

It's an interesting statistic. There are sometimes plays that end up in a turnover that really weren't the passers fault. Like a ball that hits the receiver in the hands and bounces up and gets picked. And obviously there are plenty of plays that were shitty enough that they easily could have been a turnover, but the team got lucky. Normalizing for all that would be good data. It's still somewhat of a team stat. I don't know but would guess that turnovers are more likely when teams are behind and also depend on line play, etc. It's still an interesting way to look at passers.

 

[SMU_Sox]

Most of the folks I follow and talk to, some in the media but most not, have more or less given up on Mac being the answer. Not everyone but most folks. Game 4 was the turning point. All of the things we thought Mac had overcome and started to improve on went right out the window. Having that caliber of game is just unacceptable.

At this point you have 2 years of Mac on a reduced salary. Pocket passers like him are supposed to grow from year to year. We need to see improvement because you sure as hell aren't going to get it done with Mac's physical tools alone. He can't afford to be late! And yet...

It would be best to play out the year, trade Mac in the off-season, and depending on where you are draft someone better. Or sign a veteran QB and go all-in on getting OL and receiving help (TE and WR).

For me it would take Mac playing the rest of the year at a top 10-12 level with no more holy shit games like this to consider not moving on. Not likely. I won't find it in the boxscore stats either. I can't tell from the boxscore stats if he drops a perfect throw to Bourne in the bucket but Bourne can't make a play on it. Just film review. This is week 4 too. A lot can change. Maybe this team turns it around? Recent history suggests they won't though. Well recent history and who they have on the roster.

 

[Deathofthebambino]

Yeah, for a QB that's terrible, given that other players make turnovers too.

It's an interesting statistic. There are sometimes plays that end up in a turnover that really weren't the passers fault. Like a ball that hits the receiver in the hands and bounces up and gets picked. And obviously there are plenty of plays that were shitty enough that they easily could have been a turnover, but the team got lucky. Normalizing for all that would be good data. It's still somewhat of a team stat. I don't know but would guess that turnovers are more likely when teams are behind and also depend on line play, etc. It's still an interesting way to look at passers.

It's definitely an interesting stat. IMO, the rate stats are more interesting. Mac has 146 pass attempts this year. Desmond Ridder has 118. If Mac has 10 turnover worthy throws and Ridder has 9, which is worse in that context?

Here's what PFF wrote about the stat a while ago, this may have changed since then:

What is a turnover-worthy play?

For quarterbacks, there are two ways to achieve a turnover-worthy play: throw a pass that has a high percentage chance to be intercepted or do a poor job of taking care of the ball and fumbling.

Let’s start with the coulda/woulda/shoulda interceptions. Remember, we’re isolating the quarterback’s play in the PFF system and his grade on a given play will encapsulate his decision, timing and accuracy for the throw. With that in mind, there will be many times in which a similar throw will net a different result. Misreading coverage and firing a pass to a linebacker will result in the same grade whether he catches it for an interception or not.

There are a couple more key points to remember with turnover-worthy plays:

• There are different levels of turnover-worthy plays

Not all turnover-worthy plays are created equally, and much like with big-time throws, the PFF system is able to capture the various levels of these poor throws. There’s a difference between a pass that is late and allows a defender a clean break on the ball versus the clear misread that is thrown right to a defender to the even more egregious pass right to a defender that is the easiest of catchable interceptions. All of those examples are “turnover-worthy” but not only are they at different levels when evaluating the quarterback’s play, but they also vary in how often they occur.

• Not all INT-opportunities or fumbles are turnover-worthy

We all know that not every interception is the quarterback’s fault, but even in the case of turnover-worthy plays, there may be interceptions that are considered downgrades for the quarterback, yet not turnover-worthy. Examples of plays in which the quarterback assumes some fault, yet they are still considered “unlucky” to have been intercepted, include passes with poor ball location that get deflected up in the air or overthrows that end up as interceptions on plays where they’d normally fall incomplete. We can rely on our 2017 quarterback data to know that downgradable throws from the quarterback that are not considered turnover-worthy were intercepted 2.4 percent of the time, so while the quarterback gets his proper deduction, it’s not in that turnover-worthy category if it happens to be picked. Of course, there are even clearer pictures that can be painted, whether it’s a dropped pass or even a positively graded throw that is tipped up and intercepted, the quarterback will receive proper credit for his part in the play.

As for fumbles, there are many degrees of blame when it comes to the quarterback. The first thing to note is the quirkiness of NFL rules where quarterbacks will receive the “fumble” stat on poor snaps by the center, missed handoffs, dropped pitch plays and other situations where there’s simply no clear-cut evidence that they are to blame for the play. All of those situations are graded properly for context in the PFF system, despite the fumble stat.

There are also strip-sacks that are unavoidable and mostly due to something in the pass protection and those are plays where the quarterback may be absolved of the turnover-worthy label. However, fumbles in which the quarterback has a clear chance to avoid the ball coming free will result in a heavy downgrade and it will go into the turnover-worthy play category, even if the ball is recovered by the offense. Recovering fumbles is more luck than skill, and the quarterback will receive the turnover-worthy downgrade for putting the ball in harm’s way.

• Not all turnover-worthy plays become turnovers

As the previous chart shows us, not all turnover-worthy plays will become turnovers. Using 2017 data, throws graded -1.0 were intercepted 34.7 percent of time, throws graded -1.5 were intercepted 58.3 percent of the time, and throws graded -2.0 were intercepted 83.3 percent of the time. They all fit into the turnover-worthy category despite different levels of interception probability, but there is a clear difference between the turnover-worthy throws and the throws graded -0.5 that result in an interception only 2.4 percent of the time. Therefore, it’s fair to put turnover-worthy throws in their own category, despite 48.2 percent of all turnover-worthy throws resulting in interceptions.

• But you’re grading “what-ifs”

No, we’re grading what happened, not what that resulted in. There’s no “what if” when a quarterback makes a clear misread, there’s simply a varied result on the other side of the play: interception or no interception. Staying consistent with the grading regardless of the result is the most important thing when isolating players for evaluation, and that will always be our goal at PFF.

 

[BaseballJones]

Without knowing the play call and the progressions, how do PFF analysts know whether or not the QB made the right/wrong read?

For example, consider Eli’s throw in the SB that Asante nearly picked (too soon, I know). When you rewatch it, you see that the receiver wasn’t anywhere near there. It looked like nothing but a godawful throw and clear “turnover worthy” pass by Eli.

But how do we know that he didn’t throw it right where he was supposed to, on a timing route, and the WR made a terrible mistake?

 

[SMU_Sox]

BTW - s

Without knowing the play call and the progressions, how do PFF analysts know whether or not the QB made the right/wrong read?

For example, consider Eli’s throw in the SB that Asante nearly picked (too soon, I know). When you rewatch it, you see that the receiver wasn’t anywhere near there. It looked like nothing but a godawful throw and clear “turnover worthy” pass by Eli.

But how do we know that he didn’t throw it right where he was supposed to, on a timing route, and the WR made a terrible mistake?

You don't. You can interpret it as on the QB or on the WR. It is on the offense though. Something went wrong for that kind of throw. It doesn't really matter who it is on. It's either a bad offense, bad WR, or bad QB. The bottom line is the offense is not good enough. And btw on some of these you do know. You look at the drop, you look at the coverage, you look at the distribution of the routes, etc. You learn which concepts and progressions are the right ones vs defenses. I am probably 10% of the way there. It is really tough but overall you can reduce it to a function of the offense. It's not good enough.

 

[BaseballJones]

BTW - s


You don't. You can interpret it as on the QB or on the WR. It is on the offense though. Something went wrong for that kind of throw. It doesn't really matter who it is on. It's either a bad offense, bad WR, or bad QB. The bottom line is the offense is not good enough. And btw on some of these you do know. You look at the drop, you look at the coverage, you look at the distribution of the routes, etc. You learn which concepts and progressions are the right ones vs defenses. I am probably 10% of the way there. It is really tough but overall you can reduce it to a function of the offense. It's not good enough.

Of course the offense isn’t good enough. That wasn’t the point of my question. It was specifically about how PFF analysts can know with enough certainty who is at fault for a “turnover worthy” play to attribute it to any specific player.

Or or other words, what percentage of PFF’s assignment of TWPs are erroneous, would you think?

 

[rodderick]

Without knowing the play call and the progressions, how do PFF analysts know whether or not the QB made the right/wrong read?

For example, consider Eli’s throw in the SB that Asante nearly picked (too soon, I know). When you rewatch it, you see that the receiver wasn’t anywhere near there. It looked like nothing but a godawful throw and clear “turnover worthy” pass by Eli.

But how do we know that he didn’t throw it right where he was supposed to, on a timing route, and the WR made a terrible mistake?

I don't think PFF evaluates QB play in such a granular way, and by that I mean I don't think they look at it as "in this concept he went to the backside dig and skipped over the post against man coverage, so we're docking him a point even though he completed the pass". It's more that they judge decision making in terms of "was the receiver the QB threw to open and was that a good throw to make given the context?" i.e., if you dump it down for a 2 yard gain early in the down on 3rd and 8, that's not a positive play. They aren't breaking down film in the same way JT O'Sullivan and Kurt Warner are. The main thing is giving the QB more credit for higher difficulty throws (i.e. a 35 yard pass thrown with anticipation into tight coverage on 3rd and 17 is worth way more than a screen that the RB takes 35 yards on 2nd and 2, even though both are represented as the same in the box score) and not counting the result into the process (great throw that is dropped is just counted as a great throw, dumb pass that is nearly picked still counts as a turnover worthy play).

I think they do make some adjustments for turnover worthy plays if the throw comes in with anticipation and the receiver cuts a route short, settling into a zone when he should've kept running and vice versa. But if you're heaving passes to no one in particular straight into the hands of defenders, that's counted as a turnover worthy play, they won't go deep into the concept to see if it makes sense that there was no receiver in the area of if it was reasonable for the QB to expect someone to be there and the WR must have run the wrong route. PFF is a tool, it's not the be all end all.

 

[BaseballJones]

I find all this to be so fascinating. Baseball is so much easier to assign individual stats to players. In football, context matters so much more and it’s so much harder to individualize these things.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

Most of the folks I follow and talk to, some in the media but most not, have more or less given up on Mac being the answer. Not everyone but most folks. Game 4 was the turning point. All of the things we thought Mac had overcome and started to improve on went right out the window. Having that caliber of game is just unacceptable.

At this point you have 2 years of Mac on a reduced salary. Pocket passers like him are supposed to grow from year to year. We need to see improvement because you sure as hell aren't going to get it done with Mac's physical tools alone. He can't afford to be late! And yet...

It would be best to play out the year, trade Mac in the off-season, and depending on where you are draft someone better. Or sign a veteran QB and go all-in on getting OL and receiving help (TE and WR).

For me it would take Mac playing the rest of the year at a top 10-12 level with no more holy shit games like this to consider not moving on. Not likely. I won't find it in the boxscore stats either. I can't tell from the boxscore stats if he drops a perfect throw to Bourne in the bucket but Bourne can't make a play on it. Just film review. This is week 4 too. A lot can change. Maybe this team turns it around? Recent history suggests they won't though. Well recent history and who they have on the roster.

I'm kind of curious how he responds this weekend. I think if we're talking about whether people are ready to jump ship, he is hearing it too. From the games I've watched, the Saints seem to be a pretty decent defense, so it's a test. I think Mac's stock is as low as it has ever been, including during the Zappe QB controversy last year. So it will be interesting to see how he responds. If he has a good day, it won't tell us too much and may just postpone the discussion for another day, but it will at least tell us something about his make up. If he has a crap day, we could be in avalanche territory.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

I find all this to be so fascinating. Baseball is so much easier to assign individual stats to players. In football, context matters so much more and it’s so much harder to individualize these things.

Baseball is mostly just a series of individual plays by individual players. It's definitely the least teamy of the five major sports. A batter never gets open because the defense is covering another guy.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

I find all this to be so fascinating. Baseball is so much easier to assign individual stats to players. In football, context matters so much more and it’s so much harder to individualize these things.

Agreed. And yet we have quite a few folks who think they have isolated the one true culprit.

To me its all phases but this is the NFL. Everything starts with who is under center.

 

[Deathofthebambino]

I'm kind of curious how he responds this weekend. I think if we're talking about whether people are ready to jump ship, he is hearing it too. From the games I've watched, the Saints seem to be a pretty decent defense, so it's a test. I think Mac's stock is as low as it has ever been, including during the Zappe QB controversy last year. So it will be interesting to see how he responds. If he has a good day, it won't tell us too much and may just postpone the discussion for another day, but it will at least tell us something about his make up. If he has a crap day, we could be in avalanche territory.

I think the next two weeks tell us a ton. The Eagles, Dolphins and Cowboys are going to make a lot of teams look bad this year. The Cowboys have already beaten 3 teams (Jets, Giants, Pats) by a total score of 108-13. The Eagles snatched the soul of the 2-0, at the time, Bucs even with picking off Hurts twice. If the offense can't get anything going at home against the Saints this weekend (although looks like the wind might be blowing 30mph again) and then next week in the dome at Las Vegas, this season is going to get really long, really quickly. Of course, if they do figure some things out and then get their doors blown off by Buffalo and Miami the following two weeks, we'll be doing this dance again.

I think Mac has been broken, and there's probably no coming back for him in New England, but hell, one can hope.

 

[Jimbodandy]

I find all this to be so fascinating. Baseball is so much easier to assign individual stats to players. In football, context matters so much more and it’s so much harder to individualize these things.

It would be fascinating to have an OL-independent QB stat. When Joe Burrow was getting MVP votes last year and looks like a bottom-3 QB this year by many metrics, it's hard to get an idea of how bad he's really playing without watching the games. I was never super high on Daniel Jones, but his numbers look like he has been drinking before games. As bad as Mac is right now, we are forced to infer that his good rookie year was inflated by better OL and coaching.

 

[ManicCompression]

Agreed. And yet we have quite a few folks who think they have isolated the one true culprit.

Who is arguing this? I think nearly everyone agrees this offense stinks, the wide receivers aren't good, the Oline is bad, and the coaching is leaving a lot to be desired. They all contribute to different degrees. The question in this thread, I believe, is whether Mac is additive at all to an offense and some of us, me included, are inclined to say no based on the fact that he's regressing in year three.

Is there a single person in this forum who things there is only one true culprit for the state of the offense, and their name is Mac Jones?

 

[Rico Guapo]

I feel like the pizza party gif - you know the one where the guy is bringing pizza to the party but the party is on fire?

Honestly the box score numbers are interesting but I don’t know how much they help.

https://x.com/kevincole___/status/1709943368560861495?s=46&t=kvYWuq6n2wZg-KCGv0fpWg

This is from PFF and it’s subjective but it has Mac leading the NFL with interception worthy throws. Personally I had 12 not 14 but YMMV and it’s bad. He’s not seeing the field well. And this whole thing on JTO liking or not liking Mac is a wrong. He actually wasn’t the biggest fan of Mac’s game going into the draft. He wants everyone to succeed though (kind of like me with all the guys I watch). It’s just bad. The conditions were atrocious during the Jets game so he got somewhat of a pass from me but his Jets game was not great. Specifically though the second half. Since that second half he’s been a bit of a train wreck. He will probably rebound but is that good enough? He has this panic in him. His footwork has not been fixed and is deteriorating. You’d hope by year 3 even with shit support he would look a little better and he just hasn’t. I mean he had some good moments weeks 1-2. You saw some good throws then.

Friends of Bill all have their knives out right now. I think Mac is the QB for the rest of the year but I am skeptical he will be in play for 2024. You can’t have this many bad throws when you aren’t an elite playmaker and even then…

I had such good feels from him weeks 1-2 and even parts of week 3. Hope he bounces back but not sure he can ever eliminate this type of play from his game. He’s not good enough in other areas to make up for it.

Shades of David Carr whose offensive lines also got him killed on a weekly basis until he was out of the league.

 

[slamminsammya]

Of course the offense isn’t good enough. That wasn’t the point of my question. It was specifically about how PFF analysts can know with enough certainty who is at fault for a “turnover worthy” play to attribute it to any specific player.

Or or other words, what percentage of PFF’s assignment of TWPs are erroneous, would you think?

How much noise do you think this issue is adding to their final result? I'd guess this is random enough that your final ranking of QB's by shitty plays will end up more or less the same.

 

[BaseballJones]

How much noise do you think this issue is adding to their final result? I'd guess this is random enough that your final ranking of QB's by shitty plays will end up more or less the same.

I have no idea. I assume that teams with worse receivers, for example, will run more bad routes and put their QBs in worse positions which will lead to more turnover worthy plays by the QB. But I have no way of testing this hypothesis or knowing how big an effect this could be. That’s kinda why I’m asking.

 

[slamminsammya]

I have no idea. I assume that teams with worse receivers, for example, will run more bad routes and put their QBs in worse positions which will lead to more turnover worthy plays by the QB. But I have no way of testing this hypothesis or knowing how big an effect this could be. That’s kinda why I’m asking.

Just from watching the games and from watching guys break down film on youtube it seems like the qb fucked up :: wr fucked up ratio is pretty heavily on the QB side, at least for turnover type plays. Incompletions or other forms of offensive dysfunction are a different story. I doubt correcting for this would give you a different result vis a vis mac jones. The guy has made a lot of reckless plays this season.

 

[DJnVa]

There are times in sports where a line is reached, and we no longer really need to dive deeply into numbers and see if someone is actually better than what we are actually seeing happen on the field. There comes a point where the whole "was that the WRs fault or was it the QBs fault?" ceases to actually be meaningful (and don't get me wrong, there's times where that's really important).

We seem to have crossed that Rubicon with Mac, and for many holdovers, like myself, it was last week. The people in here have watched a lot of football--good and bad. I was a Mac guy, but outside of some miraculous turnaround that starts at 1:05 pm on Sunday, we're at the point where we can trust our eyes and what we've see for the last 2+ seasons. It's not going to work with Mac. I know a lot of people on the internet see that as some sort of personal failing on Mac's part and it's not. He's just not good enough. It is what it is. He's still one of the 50 best on earth right now at what he does. The problem is this team needs one of the 10 best.

It like the polar opposite of when folks used to argue Manning vs. Brady with stats. There came a point where no one even had to use numbers any longer. It just *WAS*.

 

[rodderick]

There are times in sports where a line is reached, and we no longer really need to dive deeply into numbers and see if someone is actually better than what we are actually seeing happen on the field. There comes a point where the whole "was that the WRs fault or was it the QBs fault?" ceases to actually be meaningful (and don't get me wrong, there's times where that's really important).

We seem to have crossed that Rubicon with Mac, and for many holdovers, like myself, it was last week. The people in here have watched a lot of football--good and bad. I was a Mac guy, but outside of some miraculous turnaround that starts at 1:05 pm on Sunday, we're at the point where we can trust our eyes and what we've see for the last 2+ seasons. It's not going to work with Mac. I know a lot of people on the internet see that as some sort of personal failing on Mac's part and it's not. He's just not good enough. It is what it is. He's still one of the 50 best on earth right now at what he does. The problem is this team needs one of the 10 best.

It like the polar opposite of when folks used to argue Manning vs. Brady with stats. There came a point where no one even had to use numbers any longer. It just *WAS*.

I think people grow attached to the idea that Mac deserves to have a fair chance before the Patriots move on, but I'm sorry, that's not really how it works with professional athletes. You get the chances you get. Would I be surprised if in 4 years Mac is starting for a playoff team with talent around him and putting up solid efficiency numbers like Geno Smith? Not in the slightest. But no Jets fan is ruing letting Geno Smith go for a reason. These guys that need a lot of support are also good bets to no extract the most of the support they do get. I mean, what would the Seahawks look like right now with even Matt Stafford as their QB? They'd probably be NFC favorites. Same with Mac, I don't think he's the main issue with this team and I don't think what they have around him is enough to conjure up great offense with any QB. But there are 20 guys at least who I think would do better even with the weapons they have. Not do great, but do better.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

Who is arguing this? I think nearly everyone agrees this offense stinks, the wide receivers aren't good, the Oline is bad, and the coaching is leaving a lot to be desired. They all contribute to different degrees. The question in this thread, I believe, is whether Mac is additive at all to an offense and some of us, me included, are inclined to say no based on the fact that he's regressing in year three.

Is there a single person in this forum who things there is only one true culprit for the state of the offense, and their name is Mac Jones?

There are certainly folks who put the majority of the teams problems at Jones feet (because his arm isn't strong enough to support them). There is no value in that discussion though precisely because, as was noted upthread, its hard to take that argument seriously given the interdependent nature of their issues.

What we can say now is that even with a better/good OL and skill players, Mac probably looks a bit better but he is still unlikely to consistently generate plays when things break down. If that's a correct read, he's done here like SMU suggests upthread.

 

[Auger34]

There are times in sports where a line is reached, and we no longer really need to dive deeply into numbers and see if someone is actually better than what we are actually seeing happen on the field. There comes a point where the whole "was that the WRs fault or was it the QBs fault?" ceases to actually be meaningful (and don't get me wrong, there's times where that's really important).

We seem to have crossed that Rubicon with Mac, and for many holdovers, like myself, it was last week. The people in here have watched a lot of football--good and bad. I was a Mac guy, but outside of some miraculous turnaround that starts at 1:05 pm on Sunday, we're at the point where we can trust our eyes and what we've see for the last 2+ seasons. It's not going to work with Mac. I know a lot of people on the internet see that as some sort of personal failing on Mac's part and it's not. He's just not good enough. It is what it is. He's still one of the 50 best on earth right now at what he does. The problem is this team needs one of the 10 best.

It like the polar opposite of when folks used to argue Manning vs. Brady with stats. There came a point where no one even had to use numbers any longer. It just *WAS*.

I think this is a great post. And part of the crossing of the Rubicon for me is how much BB's guys (Lombardi, Edelman) are pointing out his failures and what he's doing wrong.

I don't think Mac has many fans left in the building

 

[sezwho]

I think the next two weeks tell us a ton. The Eagles, Dolphins and Cowboys are going to make a lot of teams look bad this year. The Cowboys have already beaten 3 teams (Jets, Giants, Pats) by a total score of 108-13. The Eagles snatched the soul of the 2-0, at the time, Bucs even with picking off Hurts twice. If the offense can't get anything going at home against the Saints this weekend (although looks like the wind might be blowing 30mph again) and then next week in the dome at Las Vegas, this season is going to get really long, really quickly. Of course, if they do figure some things out and then get their doors blown off by Buffalo and Miami the following two weeks, we'll be doing this dance again.

I think Mac has been broken, and there's probably no coming back for him in New England, but hell, one can hope.

This is where I am. There’s still a chance but Mac might be broken or maybe just broken here. Having the greatest coach of all time, a walking hall of fame bust, have his goons kill you in the press doesn’t help develop the asset. Does Lombardi/Mangini question the program?

Did Rham just decide to change everything and suck in a contract year? Maybe it just hasn’t been possible to ‘do your job’ in Bills program this season. Yet! The line could still come together and set us all free.

Lol never though I’d be looking to Zach Wilson for hope but anything is possible.

Not to go all nihilist but nothing really matters until the oline steps up.

 

[SMU_Sox]

Of course the offense isn’t good enough. That wasn’t the point of my question. It was specifically about how PFF analysts can know with enough certainty who is at fault for a “turnover worthy” play to attribute it to any specific player.

Or or other words, what percentage of PFF’s assignment of TWPs are erroneous, would you think?

I answered that though. They don’t. It’s guesswork.* There are a ton of factors that go into it but the point is if you’ve watched enough film you know Ok this is slant flat to the right and stick to the left and given it is a 3 step drop and he is looking left first then that tells me his progression is 1, 2, 3, 4 and he needs to throw it at his drop point. Then you have to do things like count steps for the WRs. Hey this is a 3-step slant, receiver starting getting up after 2 steps, the throw is behind, that’s on the WR. Or, ok the receiver ran the route right on this crosser, he throws it after his drop and is late, and the throw is behind the receiver so it’s on the QB. It’s hard but it also doesn’t matter if you want to know if the offense is performing well. If you specifically want to evaluate QB play it’s harder but yeah Mac had his worst game on Sunday.
* Guesswork but there are plays you can be 99-100% sure it was the QB or the WR.

 

[8slim]

There are times in sports where a line is reached, and we no longer really need to dive deeply into numbers and see if someone is actually better than what we are actually seeing happen on the field. There comes a point where the whole "was that the WRs fault or was it the QBs fault?" ceases to actually be meaningful (and don't get me wrong, there's times where that's really important).

We seem to have crossed that Rubicon with Mac, and for many holdovers, like myself, it was last week. The people in here have watched a lot of football--good and bad. I was a Mac guy, but outside of some miraculous turnaround that starts at 1:05 pm on Sunday, we're at the point where we can trust our eyes and what we've see for the last 2+ seasons. It's not going to work with Mac. I know a lot of people on the internet see that as some sort of personal failing on Mac's part and it's not. He's just not good enough. It is what it is. He's still one of the 50 best on earth right now at what he does. The problem is this team needs one of the 10 best.

It like the polar opposite of when folks used to argue Manning vs. Brady with stats. There came a point where no one even had to use numbers any longer. It just *WAS*.

Great post.

I’m a cockeyed optimist at heart, so I’ll still be hoping against hope that Mac and the O comes outblazing the next 2 weeks.

But deep down I think we know that while Mac may not be as bad as he was last week, he’s simply not good enough to lead a title-contending offense.

 

[Arroyoyo]

Baseball is mostly just a series of individual plays by individual players. It's definitely the least teamy of the five major sports. A batter never gets open because the defense is covering another guy.

But a batter can see more strikes because the defense doesn’t want to pitch to the next guy.

 

[tims4wins]

There are times in sports where a line is reached, and we no longer really need to dive deeply into numbers and see if someone is actually better than what we are actually seeing happen on the field. There comes a point where the whole "was that the WRs fault or was it the QBs fault?" ceases to actually be meaningful (and don't get me wrong, there's times where that's really important).

We seem to have crossed that Rubicon with Mac, and for many holdovers, like myself, it was last week. The people in here have watched a lot of football--good and bad. I was a Mac guy, but outside of some miraculous turnaround that starts at 1:05 pm on Sunday, we're at the point where we can trust our eyes and what we've see for the last 2+ seasons. It's not going to work with Mac. I know a lot of people on the internet see that as some sort of personal failing on Mac's part and it's not. He's just not good enough. It is what it is. He's still one of the 50 best on earth right now at what he does. The problem is this team needs one of the 10 best.

It like the polar opposite of when folks used to argue Manning vs. Brady with stats. There came a point where no one even had to use numbers any longer. It just *WAS*.

Fantastic post.

I think people grow attached to the idea that Mac deserves to have a fair chance before the Patriots move on, but I'm sorry, that's not really how it works with professional athletes. You get the chances you get. Would I be surprised if in 4 years Mac is starting for a playoff team with talent around him and putting up solid efficiency numbers like Geno Smith? Not in the slightest. But no Jets fan is ruing letting Geno Smith go for a reason. These guys that need a lot of support are also good bets to no extract the most of the support they do get. I mean, what would the Seahawks look like right now with even Matt Stafford as their QB? They'd probably be NFC favorites. Same with Mac, I don't think he's the main issue with this team and I don't think what they have around him is enough to conjure up great offense with any QB. But there are 20 guys at least who I think would do better even with the weapons they have. Not do great, but do better.

Love the Geno comparison.

 

[Devizier]

Mac was and remains a good draft pick, no matter how his career ends up.

All this can be true while not being a good quarterback. I’m not going to let one bad game shift me from “mediocre” though. The bust rate for quarterbacks is very high, you need to do better than a good pick, you generally need a great one.

 

[tims4wins]

All this can be true while not being a good quarterback. I’m not going to let one bad game shift me from “mediocre” though. The bust rate for quarterbacks is very high, you need to do better than a good pick, you generally need a great one.

Fully agree. It didn’t work out. You move on next year unless something changes drastically in the next 3 months. It is what it is.

 

[Jinhocho]

Edelman lays a lot on mac.

View: https://twitter.com/SavageSports_/status/1709922862969028695/mediaViewer?currentTweet=1709922862969028695&currentTweetUser=SavageSports_

 

[rodderick]

Edelman lays a lot on mac.

View: https://twitter.com/SavageSports_/status/1709922862969028695/mediaViewer?currentTweet=1709922862969028695&currentTweetUser=SavageSports_

I'll take this as another data point in the "former Patriots employees close to Bill shitting on Mac Jones" narrative. I'll listen to the podcast and see if Jules is laying some blame on Bill for roster building or whatever, but the "defense has been there" comment in particular sounded pointed, to me.

 

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

I think this is a great post. And part of the crossing of the Rubicon for me is how much BB's guys (Lombardi, Edelman) are pointing out his failures and what he's doing wrong.

I don't think Mac has many fans left in the building

For me it was learning about the stat that Mac is now 0-11 as a starter when his team is the underdog. Forget all the failed drives that might have won games, or the bad luck that's associated with many of them, it was that stat that showed me that Mac is never going to be an effective and winning starting QB here, that he will never elevate his team beyond exactly what they might be on paper.

You can't win anything in this league unless you at least occasionally punch above your weight.

 

[rodderick]

For me it was learning about the stat that Mac is now 0-11 as a starter when his team is the underdog. Forget all the failed drives that might have won games, or the bad luck that's associated with many of them, it was that stat that showed me that Mac is never going to be an effective and winning starting QB here, that he will never elevate his team beyond exactly what they might be on paper.

You can't win anything in this league unless you at least occasionally punch above your weight.

They're also 2-10 against the spread as underdogs since the start of last year, which is insane considering only 8 teams in the league are even below .500 in that time frame. Dead last in cover% as underdogs in the Mac Jones era (going back to 2021). They just can't overcome any adversity whatsoever.

 

[Rico Guapo]

For me it was learning about the stat that Mac is now 0-11 as a starter when his team is the underdog. Forget all the failed drives that might have won games, or the bad luck that's associated with many of them, it was that stat that showed me that Mac is never going to be an effective and winning starting QB here, that he will never elevate his team beyond exactly what they might be on paper.

You can't win anything in this league unless you at least occasionally punch above your weight.

Or maybe the team just isn't good?

 

[tims4wins]

Or maybe the team just isn't good?

The 1-13 (?) Dolphins beat the 13-1 (?) Patriots in 2004. Even the worst teams luck into wins as an underdog from time to time.

 

[DJnVa]

Or maybe the team just isn't good?

Underdogs win slightly more than a third of the time in the NFL. He's won 0%.

Although maybe Sunday's like slides to Pats +.5 and he gets one.

 

[mauf]

I thought months ago that BB should’ve brought in a veteran like Jacoby Brissett or Gardner Minshew to compete with Mac and Zappe for the starting job, so I’m definitely ready to move on. But I don’t think the stats about the team’s performance as an underdog are illuminating at all.

Those stats tell us the Pats have been worse than expected. They might tell us that Vegas is giving BB more credit than he deserves. But they don’t tell us shit about Mac, beyond him being a big part of why the Pats have underperformed relative to expectations.

Put it this way: if BB continues to give Mac rope, Vegas will adjust, and Mac will start covering some spreads as an underdog — not because he’ll be better, but because expectations will be recalibrated.

 

[slamminsammya]

I thought months ago that BB should’ve brought in a veteran like Jacoby Brissett or Gardner Minshew to compete with Mac and Zappe for the starting job, so I’m definitely ready to move on. But I don’t think the stats about the team’s performance as an underdog are illuminating at all.

Those stats tell us the Pats have been worse than expected. They might tell us that Vegas is giving BB more credit than he deserves. But they don’t tell us shit about Mac, beyond him being a big part of why the Pats have underperformed relative to expectations.

Put it this way: if BB continues to give Mac rope, Vegas will adjust, and Mac will start covering some spreads as an underdog — not because he’ll be better, but because expectations will be recalibrated.

if my family has taught me anything it's that you can always continue to disappoint even after expectations have been lowered

 

[johnmd20]

I thought months ago that BB should’ve brought in a veteran like Jacoby Brissett or Gardner Minshew to compete with Mac and Zappe for the starting job, so I’m definitely ready to move on. But I don’t think the stats about the team’s performance as an underdog are illuminating at all.

Those stats tell us the Pats have been worse than expected. They might tell us that Vegas is giving BB more credit than he deserves. But they don’t tell us shit about Mac, beyond him being a big part of why the Pats have underperformed relative to expectations.

Put it this way: if BB continues to give Mac rope, Vegas will adjust, and Mac will start covering some spreads as an underdog — not because he’ll be better, but because expectations will be recalibrated.

Amazingly, Arizona picked up Josh Dobbs for absolutely nothing (Cleveland gave up a 7th, got back a 5th) in the last week of August this year.

He is playing significantly better than Mac, it's not even close. There is sometimes talent out there. It seems like the Pats never find it. And when they do find it in Gonzalez or Judon, they get hurt and are out for the season.

This season is lost. There is nothing the Pats can do after literally losing their two best players for the rest of the season. They stunk with them. Next man up is good and all but sometimes the next man up isn't close to what they are replacing. Alas, sometimes you have to rebuild. 2023 is lost. The schedule was always tough as it is. The OL is piss poor. Mac is plateauing. Rhamondri has been lousy. The WRs. Lol. The Eagles have AJ and DS running around all over the field. Seattle DK and Lockett and JSN. Miami Hill and Waddle. Buffalo has Diggs and Gabe the Babe.

The Pats have Juju and. . . .Kendrick Bourne.

 

[Silverdude2167]

Amazingly, Arizona picked up Josh Dobbs for absolutely nothing (Cleveland gave up a 7th, got back a 5th) in the last week of August this year.

He is playing significantly better than Mac, it's not even close. There is sometimes talent out there. It seems like the Pats never find it. And when they do find it in Gonzalez or Judon, they get hurt and are out for the season.

This season is lost. There is nothing the Pats can do after literally losing their two best players for the rest of the season. They stunk with them. Next man up is good and all but sometimes the next man up isn't close to what they are replacing. Alas, sometimes you have to rebuild. 2023 is lost. The schedule was always tough as it is. The OL is piss poor. Mac is plateauing. Rhamondri has been lousy. The WRs. Lol. The Eagles have AJ and DS running around all over the field. Seattle DK and Lockett and JSN. Miami Hill and Waddle. Buffalo has Diggs and Gabe the Babe.

The Pats have Juju and. . . .Kendrick Bourne.

Just so we are clear you are upset the Pats did not trade for Josh Dobbs?

Also, the Pats find lots of talent, jesus.

 

[BaseballJones]

Just so we are clear you are upset the Pats did not trade for Josh Dobbs?

Also, the Pats find lots of talent, jesus.

Much moreso on defense than offense.

 

[johnmd20]

Just so we are clear you are upset the Pats did not trade for Josh Dobbs?

Also, the Pats find lots of talent, jesus.

Definitely. Jonnu Smith. Mike G. Nelson A. Juju. Ezekiel. They have been littered with A grade talent on offense. No doubt.

 

[johnmd20]

Just so we are clear you are upset the Pats did not trade for Josh Dobbs?

Also, the Pats find lots of talent, jesus.

And just so we're clear, I am upset that the Pats went into this season with no Plan B at QB when their Plan A has regressed for two straight years. They aren't trying anything, just doing the same shit and getting the same results.

 

[Old Fart Tree]

For me it was learning about the stat that Mac is now 0-11 as a starter when his team is the underdog. Forget all the failed drives that might have won games, or the bad luck that's associated with many of them, it was that stat that showed me that Mac is never going to be an effective and winning starting QB here, that he will never elevate his team beyond exactly what they might be on paper.

You can't win anything in this league unless you at least occasionally punch above your weight.

No disagreement, but they weren’t dogs against Buffalo in that goofy win?

 

[tims4wins]

No disagreement, but they weren’t dogs against Buffalo in that goofy win?

They absolutely were underdogs.