The Michael McCorkle "Mac" Jones Thread

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,902
Hingham, MA
[The people obsessing over the 3 points thing are way too focused on outcomes v process IMO]
Just like sometimes things look better than they actually were (blowouts vs. Lions and Browns, and some of last year's blowouts), sometimes things look worse than they actually were. I think yesterday's game falls into the latter bucket.

The game reminded me a lot of SB 53 to be honest. Statistically a dominant performance, but several little miscues added up to prevent it from showing up on the scoreboard. The Pats should have probably put up upper teens or low 20s yesterday. Given the opposing defense, conditions, and opposing offense, that's a winning formula. But multiple holding calls, illegal formation, missed kicks (due to wind, but also somewhat due to Mac), Smith fumble... it all added up to not putting points on the board.

There is no arguing that they HAVE to do a better job of converting drives into points. And that Mac is part of the problem - primarily pocket awareness / mobility. I did think he stepped up a few times nicely around pressure yesterday - there was one where he found Rham on the near right sideline (the one where Rham made the first guy miss), and also on the 3rd down play to Meyers that fell incomplete (Mac did a nice job moving around the pocket, but ultimately I think his footwork was poor on the throw, which led to the incompletion).
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,902
Hingham, MA
FOund a few:
View: https://twitter.com/7RoundsInHeaven/status/1594420566483673088


That one to me is at least partially probably mostly on Mac, doesn't step up, had 2 guys coming open if he did.

This one:
View: https://twitter.com/MikeGiardi/status/1594416715060084736


3.15 seconds is a while, but 3rd and long lot of long routes only guy he can complete it to is Henry, but he's still looking left, probably should have at least dumped it, but a lot of that is just not having options.

This one:
https://www.nfl.com/videos/bryce-huff-secures-jets-fifth-sack-of-game-on-mac-jones
I have no idea what he's doing with his feet, RT eventually gets blown up, but Mac was not exactly showing great pocket presence.


FAKE EDIT-
Okay, found a video of them all, not going to erase above but here it is:
https://www.nfl.com/videos/every-jets-sack-in-6-sack-game-week-11

Sack 1- not on Mac at all, quick throws all covered, jailbreak so he eats it.
Sack 2- some on Mac, he doesn't feel it, then looks right at the rusher and seems unsure what to do, doesn't run and doesn't get rid of it.
Sack 3- addressed above
Sack 4- addressed above
Sack 5- addressed above
Sack 6- the one you mentioned.

So I'd say some were all or partially his fault, some were ones he can't do much about.
Also, part of it is that he has no real mobility at all, and his awareness (pre and post snap) isn't that great. Non-mobile QBs are kind of a dying breed, and those that are left are really good at sensing/identifying pressure and sliding away or getting rid of it. Mac isn't there yet (maybe never will be).
Edit- and of course thinking about Mac long term this is something to watch, not being mobile much like not having a great arm limits you in more than just runs, it lets defenses play you differently, and it means you are much more at the mercy of your O-line. If we had say Fields (not any better as a passer)... he turns a couple of those sacks in 1st down runs (also the Jets probably rush fewer guys much of the time).


I agree, we should not trade for Zach Wilson, glad you cleared that up.
Thank you for posting this.

My quick take is that sacks 2 and 3 were pretty bad by Mac. 1 and 6 not his fault at all. 4 and 5, mixed bag. So overall ~50% Mac, ~50% line.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,629
This thread has some hysteria. But to answer your question the obvious answer is Josh. That said, it's very unlikely BB is going to move away from Matt and Joe in the offseason and just reinstate Josh assuming the Raiders end up like 5-12 and he's fired. BB is not going to bring in Reich.
If they make an in-season move, which I doubt, I would assume it comes after the Vikings game, when they have a few extra days.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
26,102
Unreal America
It's very easy to be Mac Jones because when you have a tragic box score against Baltimore people will say you have to disregard that and look at all the big time throws he made and how he was asked to go down field so often which of course will lead to turnovers. Now when he makes zero plays against the Jets and plays the safe kind of ball they did in 2021 that precipitated the schematic change in the first place, it's all about how pretty his box score looks. The bar is super low for a second year first round QB for some reason. He wasn't awful or anything yesterday, but this can't be the standard for what's considered a good game.
It's not like this thread is full of Mac fanboys. Basically the camps are "Mac stinks" and "Mac may stink but we probably need to see more".
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
26,102
Unreal America
One thing I have determined is that in the 2022 NFL, simple QB box scores mean absolutely nothing. And that isn't merely a Mac thing, it's an every QB thing. Every week there are guys putting up 65%+ completion rates with big yardage, and yet their play can be called "not good". It's a weird league and I'm not sure anyone has cracked the code on how to best evaluate QB performance statistically.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
36,242
Deep inside Muppet Labs
One thing I have determined is that in the 2022 NFL, simple QB box scores mean absolutely nothing. And that isn't merely a Mac thing, it's an every QB thing. Every week there are guys putting up 65%+ completion rates with big yardage, and yet their play can be called "not good". It's a weird league and I'm not sure anyone has cracked the code on how to best evaluate QB performance statistically.
This is an excellent point and something I've been prone to do myself. Statistically, Mac's game yesterday "*looks* good. On the field, it was awful. Blame-wise, it's hard to tell how much blame should go to Mac and how much goes to the OL. And results-wise, it resulted in 3 points.

Not sure how to properly suss everything out after that.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,902
Hingham, MA
It's not like this thread is full of Mac fanboys. Basically the camps are "Mac stinks" and "Mac may stink but we probably need to see more".
I think this is accurate and well put.
One thing I have determined is that in the 2022 NFL, simple QB box scores mean absolutely nothing. And that isn't merely a Mac thing, it's an every QB thing. Every week there are guys putting up 65%+ completion rates with big yardage, and yet their play can be called "not good". It's a weird league and I'm not sure anyone has cracked the code on how to best evaluate QB performance statistically.
Ditto this.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,062
Mansfield MA
Good summary, just a note that the second missed Folk FG was made 7ish yards harder because Max took a sack there. They had the FG in their pocket, you have to be willing to throw it away and ensure you don’t get sacked. He held it too long there and therefore shoulders a good bit of the blame on the miss
Mac took sacks preceding both missed field goals, FWIW.

The game reminded me a lot of SB 53 to be honest. Statistically a dominant performance, but several little miscues added up to prevent it from showing up on the scoreboard. The Pats should have probably put up upper teens or low 20s yesterday. Given the opposing defense, conditions, and opposing offense, that's a winning formula. But multiple holding calls, illegal formation, missed kicks (due to wind, but also somewhat due to Mac), Smith fumble... it all added up to not putting points on the board.
It was a dominant performance defensively. It was a bad performance offensively. The Pats gained over 400 yards vs the Rams in 53, less than 300 yesterday. They only really threatened on the three (attempted) FG drives and one of them didn't even make it into the red zone. At no time were they close to scoring in the upper teens or low 20s. They had awful starting field position in 53, yesterday's was average.

It's not like this thread is full of Mac fanboys. Basically the camps are "Mac stinks" and "Mac may stink but we probably need to see more".
I think part of it is some people are talking about Mac's present and some are talking about his future. Mac stinks right now (though yesterday was not really his fault IMO), but maybe he can get better.

One thing I have determined is that in the 2022 NFL, simple QB box scores mean absolutely nothing. And that isn't merely a Mac thing, it's an every QB thing. Every week there are guys putting up 65%+ completion rates with big yardage, and yet their play can be called "not good". It's a weird league and I'm not sure anyone has cracked the code on how to best evaluate QB performance statistically.
After carefully looking at the box score, I think the disconnect between Mac's line and the outcome mostly relates to how bad the run game was yesterday. 'Mondre had 15 carries with a long run of five and a grand total of ONE first down. They had five rushing firsts all day - two good Harris runs, Stevenson in the 4th, a Mac sneak, and the Jonnu end around where he fumbled. Mac had a lot of empty calorie completions that didn't gain firsts, but I think they were just kind of the best he could do with how behind the sticks they were all day.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,902
Hingham, MA
It was a dominant performance defensively. It was a bad performance offensively. The Pats gained over 400 yards vs the Rams in 53, less than 300 yesterday. They only really threatened on the three (attempted) FG drives and one of them didn't even make it into the red zone. At no time were they close to scoring in the upper teens or low 20s. They had awful starting field position in 53, yesterday's was average.
To be clear, I didn't mean to imply that they were close to scoring 20. I meant to imply that they probably should have gotten into the 17-23 range given how they played. They had 4th and 1 inside the 10 early; the other failed 4th down drive; the missed FGs; the potential Jonnu TD where he fumbled and they settled for the FG; their last drive where they had the ball near midfield and Mac ran the sneak on 2nd and they failed on 3rd. They made mistakes on all those drives that cost them points. They didn't necessarily deserve to score more given the mistakes. But I don't think you have to squint hard to see where they play an extremely similar game and put up 17-23.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
43,975
AZ
It's very easy to be Mac Jones because when you have a tragic box score against Baltimore people will say you have to disregard that and look at all the big time throws he made and how he was asked to go down field so often which of course will lead to turnovers. Now when he makes zero plays against the Jets and plays the safe kind of ball they did in 2021 that precipitated the schematic change in the first place, it's all about how pretty his box score looks. The bar is super low for a second year first round QB for some reason. He wasn't awful or anything yesterday, but this can't be the standard for what's considered a good game.
It’s the defense and special teams. If this game and the Pittsburgh games are losses and they are 4-6, the conversation is different.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,482
Every QB has some "empty calorie" yards, but I think Mac made some big plays.

On the FG drive, on 2nd and 8 from the NE 49 he hit Meyers for 11 and a first. On 2nd and 11 from the NY 41, he hit Parker for 10 yards. On 2nd and 8 from the NY 27, he hit Stevenson for 7 yards.

On the next drive, on 3rd and 6 from the NE 34, he hit Meyers for 13 and a first. On 3rd and 16 from the NY 33, he hit Stevenson for 18 and a first. Now to be fair, on that play, that was a hell of an effort by Stevenson so he gets 95% of the credit there.

On the missed FG drive in the 3rd Q, on 1st and 10 from the NY 37, he hit Harris for 15 yards and a first.

On the next drive, they had the ball at the NE 15 and the field position was bad. The first two plays were 20 yards completions to Meyers and Henry to move the ball to the NY 45. They punted, but field position was flipped.

On the next drive, on 1st and 10, Mac started the drive with a 13 yard completion. They failed on fourth down, but Mac got the drive off on the right foot.

On the next drive, after a NE penalty pushed them back to their 18, Mac hit Stevenson for 17 giving them a chance to get the first down, which they did. That allowed them to once again flip field position and push the Jets deep into their own territory.

So that's 144 yards that can't remotely be considered "empty". They were productive and important in a game where field position mattered a TON.

Again, NOBODY is saying that Mac was Dan Marino out there. But it's untrue that his day was full of empty yards and meaningless completions. He helped field position a lot without a single turnover on a day where the other QB couldn't even do that.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
27,746
Newton
This season has been a lot more enjoyable for me than for, I suspect, a lot of posters who are griping about Mac and posting about how Patricia should "design a rocket and fire himself into the sun" -- in large part because I have looked at this season more as a process of building a new offense for Mac with all the hiccups and steps backward you would expect. The first half of the year was him stretching the field and taking shots -- he proved he could make those throws but not without a lot of errors and communication problems. Since he's come back from the injury it's been more about being careful with the ball and making better decisions.

All of which is to say I'm almost viewing these games as live reps for Mac. For instance, there was a drive yesterday that ended with an awful sack. If ever you'd have expected the Pats to follow that up by just running Stevenson and Harris twice with maybe one short pass or screen thrown in there to avoid another costly sack it would have been there. And yet, on first down, they had Mac drop back again on a designed play which resulted in a nice gain (to Meyers, I believe). That's a team that cares more about the war than the battle. They are clearly trying to just give Mac as many reps in this system as possible -- tho what's kind of interesting is that they are actually winning these games, even against good-to-great defenses like the Jets.

Which isn't to say you don't want to see results. For the last third of the season, my hope would be that we see a bit more of a blend -- Mac being careful with the ball but with a bit more of that killer instinct we saw from Mac last year (ie, the bomb after the Diggs INT against Dallas). I know we haven't seen that much from Mac this season outside of maybe Baltimore but I still think it's there and, if the OL can clean itself up a bit (big if), we'll see it more.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,062
Mansfield MA
To be clear, I didn't mean to imply that they were close to scoring 20. I meant to imply that they probably should have gotten into the 17-23 range given how they played. They had 4th and 1 inside the 10 early; the other failed 4th down drive; the missed FGs; the potential Jonnu TD where he fumbled and they settled for the FG; their last drive where they had the ball near midfield and Mac ran the sneak on 2nd and they failed on 3rd. They made mistakes on all those drives that cost them points. They didn't necessarily deserve to score more given the mistakes. But I don't think you have to squint hard to see where they play an extremely similar game and put up 17-23.
I think that's still too high. Maybe an "everything breaks right scenario." The "potential Jonnu TD" is the same drive as the "4th and 1 inside the 10" so you're double counting. They only gained 20 yards on the drive where they turned it over on downs and went three-and-out on the failed sneak drive, so those were not good possessions either. I can buy they should have scored 13 maybe (TD on the FG drive and hit the two FG drives) but obviously that's still pretty bad. You have to squint pretty damn hard to see 17-23.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,902
Hingham, MA
I think that's still too high. Maybe an "everything breaks right scenario." The "potential Jonnu TD" is the same drive as the "4th and 1 inside the 10" so you're double counting. They only gained 20 yards on the drive where they turned it over on downs and went three-and-out on the failed sneak drive, so those were not good possessions either. I can buy they should have scored 13 maybe (TD on the FG drive and hit the two FG drives) but obviously that's still pretty bad. You have to squint pretty damn hard to see 17-23.
Ah good point about the Jonnu TD. I was definitely double counting that.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
26,102
Unreal America
The Jets simply don't give up many points. Yes, 3 is bad, full stop, no one is disputing that. But I don't think we should have been expecting more than 20, particularly given Folks' trouble with making FGs into the wind.
 

BigJimEd

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
4,500
Playing against a good defense and in less than ideal conditions, I think Mac had a pretty good day.

Second most passing yards the Jets have given up this year. Seem liked Jets were focused on the run but Mac, for most part, took what was there. On the flip side, Jets D was probably ok with that and were confident they could stop the Pats as they got toward the red zone. I'll be interested to see how the Jets changed up on D when the Patriots got into their end of the field.


I think someone upthread mentioned that this game didn't give them much insight into Mac's long term prognosis. I think that's fair. Honestly, I am not expecting too much rest of the season with the health of the line and quality of play the last couple weeks. Sounds like bad news on Andrews and who knows with Wynn. Probably need to continue with more short and intermediate throws with varying success depending on the D.
 

Ferm Sheller

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2007
21,560
Will be interesting to see how he does against a banged up, depleted Vikings defense in a few days. I have a premonition that Thornton is going to have a big game.
 

E5 Yaz

polka king
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
92,089
Oregon
It's a weird league and I'm not sure anyone has cracked the code on how to best evaluate QB performance statistically.
I never look at these things but, to build upon your point, yesterday's QBR for the game was 24.5 to 20.4 ... in favor of Wilson. Say what you want, but there was no way Wilson was better than Jones yesterday.
Meanwhile, the traditional rating was 104.6-50.8 in favor Jones.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
25,482
I never look at these things but, to build upon your point, yesterday's QBR for the game was 24.5 to 20.4 ... in favor of Wilson. Say what you want, but there was no way Wilson was better than Jones yesterday.
Meanwhile, the traditional rating was 104.6-50.8 in favor Jones.
That’s a hell of a black box for QBR to have Wilson better than Mac yesterday. LOL
 

Bigdogx

New Member
Jul 21, 2020
195
Wilson and Jones both suck, i just can't understand why some fans continue to cling here. When it is fact that we would of seen better game yesterday if both White and Zappe played says it all imo!

Let's stop pretending that dump off passes that Stevenson made chicken salad out of chicken s#@t with is any kind of impressive for Jones. He didn't turn it over so i guess that is a win but christ this offense is like watching a division 3 college program!
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
9,087
Philly
I will tell you what. I’ll charity bet on a couple things. 1) $25 to whatever LGBTQ charity SJH picks if Mac was partially responsible for 4 of his sacks and 2) $50 to whatever LGBTQ charity I choose if Mac doesn’t get a higher PFF game grade on this than his season average (and $25 if it isn’t a 70 or better). Obviously the nature of the charities is due to the tragedy this weekend. Let’s make it interesting.
PFF charting has him partially or completely responsible for 1/10 pressures, a sack. I had it as 2. Either way I win this one. Keep in mind there is a difference between the sack is his fault and even though the sack isn’t his fault an elite QB would figure out a way to quickly throw it away.
His grade for the game was a 64.2, his second highest of the season so all I owe is $25.

Shocked that the line only gave up 10 pressures. That’s not a bad rate! However when the pressures are as dramatic and bad as they were it’s problematic. 60% pressure to sack rate is really bad btw.

Here are the league”leaders” in pressure to sack rate:

Mac is second of the starters and the guy he is most compared to style wise, Burrow, is first. (Ignoring Sam E, fuck ‘em Horns).

I wish there was a stat “escaped pressures” or “negated pressures” because my theory is Mac would be low on that stat this year.
 

Attachments

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
26,102
Unreal America
Wilson and Jones both suck, i just can't understand why some fans continue to cling here. When it is fact that we would of seen better game yesterday if both White and Zappe played says it all imo!

Let's stop pretending that dump off passes that Stevenson made chicken salad out of chicken s#@t with is any kind of impressive for Jones. He didn't turn it over so i guess that is a win but christ this offense is like watching a division 3 college program!
Fact?

OK, hoss.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
11,353
In reading all of this thread recently it seems like 80% of the posters all agree it’s just the degrees.

don’t want to speak for anyone but it appears as if everyone has given up on the idea that Mac will be an elite/Pro Bowl QB.

Some people think he could be better than a “game manager” but that numbers rapidly dwindling.

Admittedly, I have not watched every snap this year but I’ve not changed my opinion on him too much from last year (although I think I was a good deal lower on him than consensus).

I think he’s a decent starting option that can win if the roster around him is very good. I don’t think he’s a QB who can consistently help you win games on his own. Maybe one or two a year but definitely nothing more than that.

I am kind of imaging him as a Goff/Pennington type. He doesn’t lose them for you but he doesn’t win them for you either
 

StupendousMan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,947
I wish there was a stat “escaped pressures” or “negated pressures” because my theory is Mac would be low on that stat this year.
Thanks for bringing this up, SMU_Sox, because I think this is one of the main reasons that I grow frustrated when watching Mac in the QB position. He may still be healing from an ankle injury, so it's not quite fair for me to say this, but he seems almost completely helpless when pressure builds. I am having trouble recalling the last time that he escaped from a heavy rush, or took off to run for a first down, or even positive yards. Yes, I know he has done so, but has it happened much in the past few games? The difference between his reactions to pressure and those of recent opponents' QBs -- Wilson and Fields, especially -- is night and day.

And yes, I know that this is a minor component of a quarterback's skill set: reading the defense, making good decisions, and being able to throw the ball accurately -- those are more important, sure. It's just a personal, visceral reaction that hits me when I watch him fold up gently. Probably more my problem than his.
 

Justthetippett

New Member
Aug 9, 2015
2,868
Thanks for bringing this up, SMU_Sox, because I think this is one of the main reasons that I grow frustrated when watching Mac in the QB position. He may still be healing from an ankle injury, so it's not quite fair for me to say this, but he seems almost completely helpless when pressure builds. I am having trouble recalling the last time that he escaped from a heavy rush, or took off to run for a first down, or even positive yards. Yes, I know he has done so, but has it happened much in the past few games? The difference between his reactions to pressure and those of recent opponents' QBs -- Wilson and Fields, especially -- is night and day.

And yes, I know that this is a minor component of a quarterback's skill set: reading the defense, making good decisions, and being able to throw the ball accurately -- those are more important, sure. It's just a personal, visceral reaction that hits me when I watch him fold up gently. Probably more my problem than his.
It doesn’t help that this is something Brady absolutely excelled at, even during his more choppy seasons, so our perception is most definitely off. Seems to me to be a really difficult thing to objectively assess across different games/teams/contexts, but it’s very apparent in the course of a game. It’s also a different thing to take a sack when the offense is capable of digging itself out of holes with bigger plays. As soon as this team gets behind the chains, things get very stretched and hopeless looking.
 

Bowser

New Member
Sep 27, 2019
440
Again, my question is this. If Jones proves to be an ok game manager and they manage to make some noise in the playoffs, does that change anything?
It's a good question. Me? I'm not happy with a game manager. It's rare historically for a game manager to win a championship, and now I think it's impossible. Defenses are too sophisticated, too fast. I'm not sure Mac has the raw skills -- even the vision and processing skills -- to be successful in a high-stakes game against a top team.

As to Saint Zappe...
No love for this?

Wilson and Jones both suck, i just can't understand why some fans continue to cling here.
I cling because, frankly, I'm not ready to acknowledge Mac isn't the answer. After last year I convinced myself he was cut from the same cloth as Tom Brady. Smart as hell, accurate, had top-notch character, a leader. No, he'd never be Brady but, shit, his girlfriend ran patterns for him. I loved seeing him run the length of the field at the Pro Bowl and do the Griddy. Mac Jones had swag, and I thought other players saw it, too. He put in the work during the offseason. His arm would improve. And now the Tony Eason comparisons? Not ready to go there just yet.

Edit: Deleted faint praise for Saint Zappe.
 
Last edited:

Gash Prex

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 18, 2002
6,938
It's hard to discuss without further context of QB pressure league-wide. Undoubtedly the better QBs are able to avoid pressure much better than Mac has shown.
Here is your context for week 11

View: https://twitter.com/RealAlexBarth/status/1594731338594385920

And for the season

View: https://twitter.com/RealAlexBarth/status/1594760193103233027



Here is some more in depth analysis by Mike Giardi with plays showing how badly the line played

View: https://twitter.com/MikeGiardi/status/1594693187653799940


As for yesterday, I thought it was a good step in the right direction for Mac this season. Now I just hope they can build on it moving forward against the Vikings who are nowhere near as good as the Jets. The Jets dominated the Pats o-line in both games. I thought Mac looked much better yesterday than the previous game.

don’t want to speak for anyone but it appears as if everyone has given up on the idea that Mac will be an elite/Pro Bowl QB.
I've certainly not given up - the play by play hot takes are way too much for me. Mac was literally a Pro Bowl QB last year and had a top 5 rookie QB season. Season 2 has been a massive disappointment for the offense and Mac but I'm not ready to make final judgments about his career like 90% of the other folks in this thread.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,902
Hingham, MA
Wonder how much of the pressure issue is Jets-specific. 6 sacks both games against them. They're pretty good.

He also took 4 sacks vs. Indy. Hurts took 3 yesterday for context.

21 sacks for Mac in 6+ games for Mac is obviously way too many. But the breakdown of 16 in the last 3 games, vs. 5 in the first three games, is jarring. How much that all falls on Mac vs. the line vs. the opposing defenses, may be hard to determine.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
27,746
Newton
Josh Allen had a rating of 46.8 against the Jets two weeks ago and two INTs. Mac had a rating of 104.6 and no interceptions. Neither had any TDs but Buffalo lost and we won. Sometimes not doing anything to lose the game is doing something to win the game. And as @BaseballJones has shown, it's not like he didn't pass the ball yesterday.

Ok, since I've been one of the guys quasi-defending Mac on this board, here's a question we haven't really debated: does Mac deserve any of the blame for the poor OL play? @SMU_Sox has talked a lot about Mac not seeing things great post-snap, is he not seeing things pre-snap either? Could that also be partly why Zappe looked more comfortable back there?
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,935
I remain skeptical of Jones long-term but think there is more skill to be unlocked which, for whatever reason, isn’t showing this year. I’m not convinced he’ll ever be that dynamic of a QB even with a better OL but I do think his upside is “guy you can win with if everything else is good”.

I will say that watching Wilson yesterday gave me more of an appreciation of Mac. It’s hard to win with a limited guy like Mac but it can be done. It’s almost impossible to win with a garbage QB like Wilson. I don’t care what tools he has - this could be a Ryan Leaf style pick. He just looks so bad out there and has the shitty Leaf personality as well.

These next 2 weeks will be a nice test for Mac and the Pats. The defense won’t be able to do it alone. They’ll need help. Can Mac and the offense provide any? We’ll see.
 

Bigdogx

New Member
Jul 21, 2020
195
I cling because, frankly, I'm not ready to acknowledge Mac isn't the answer. After last year I convinced myself he was cut from the same cloth as Tom Brady. Smart as hell, accurate, had top-notch character, a leader. No, he'd never be Brady but, shit, his girlfriend ran patterns for him. I loved seeing him run the length of the field at the Pro Bowl and do the Griddy. Mac Jones had swag, and I thought other players saw it, too. He put in the work during the offseason. His arm would improve. And now the Tony Eason comparisons? Not ready to go there just yet.

Edit: Deleted faint praise for Saint Zappe.
Yikes, even i don't think he is that bad lol.
 

8slim

has trust issues
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
26,102
Unreal America
does Mac deserve any of the blame for the poor OL play?
Almost certainly, yes. It's just really difficult to tease out how much. I'm pretty sympathetic to Mac, since I think the OL and offensive coaching is subpar. But he definitely has a slow trigger at times, and that compounds the OL's struggles.
 

phineas gage

New Member
Jan 2, 2009
99
this could be a Ryan Leaf style pick
That is an excellent comparison, IMO. And if it turns out to be accurate, leave it to the Jets to make that pick.

The other notorious QB disaster of the '90's was Marinovich, but he was all kind of screwed up in many ways.

I'm not sure the Eason comparison is fair (yet), but I think Jones does have to worry about the 'soft' label getting attached to him. That perception is hard to get rid of (again, whether fair or not...).
 
Last edited:

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
35,736
I remain skeptical of Jones long-term but think there is more skill to be unlocked which, for whatever reason, isn’t showing this year. I’m not convinced he’ll ever be that dynamic of a QB even with a better OL but I do think his upside is “guy you can win with if everything else is good”.

I will say that watching Wilson yesterday gave me more of an appreciation of Mac. It’s hard to win with a limited guy like Mac but it can be done. It’s almost impossible to win with a garbage QB like Wilson. I don’t care what tools he has - this could be a Ryan Leaf style pick. He just looks so bad out there and has the shitty Leaf personality as well.

These next 2 weeks will be a nice test for Mac and the Pats. The defense won’t be able to do it alone. They’ll need help. Can Mac and the offense provide any? We’ll see.
yeah, I think even people down on Mac think he's an NFL backup. Wilson certainly looks like he's a total bust.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
31,559
Ok, since I've been one of the guys quasi-defending Mac on this board, here's a question we haven't really debated: does Mac deserve any of the blame for the poor OL play? @SMU_Sox has talked a lot about Mac not seeing things great post-snap, is he not seeing things pre-snap either? Could that also be partly why Zappe looked more comfortable back there?
The PFF and Giardi quotes from above try to shed some light on that.
 

Bowser

New Member
Sep 27, 2019
440
I posted something close to this in 2021 and got my hand slapped because it came from Walter Football. Below are pre-draft comments on Wilson from one NFC director of college scouting:
Johnny Manziel comp without the [drugs]. Someone will grab him in the first. I doubt he gets to the second, because once the third quarterback goes after Lawrence and Fields, there will be a run on them. He has character concerns, a rich kid who is an entitled brat. Uncle owns Jet Blue. Parents are a pain. Not a leader, selfish, and he's a know-it-all.
The chickens have come home to roost.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
12,381
around the way
Here is your context for week 11

View: https://twitter.com/RealAlexBarth/status/1594731338594385920

And for the season

View: https://twitter.com/RealAlexBarth/status/1594760193103233027



Here is some more in depth analysis by Mike Giardi with plays showing how badly the line played

View: https://twitter.com/MikeGiardi/status/1594693187653799940


As for yesterday, I thought it was a good step in the right direction for Mac this season. Now I just hope they can build on it moving forward against the Vikings who are nowhere near as good as the Jets. The Jets dominated the Pats o-line in both games. I thought Mac looked much better yesterday than the previous game.



I've certainly not given up - the play by play hot takes are way too much for me. Mac was literally a Pro Bowl QB last year and had a top 5 rookie QB season. Season 2 has been a massive disappointment for the offense and Mac but I'm not ready to make final judgments about his career like 90% of the other folks in this thread.
Good facts. Thanks for this.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,910
306, row 14
FWIW, I think another pressure point is they've been unable to consistently run the ball for the past 4 games. Stevenson has 196 yards on 57 carries during that stretch, 3.44 YPC. He was over 5 YPC in the previous 6 games. Harris has been dealing with injury and did hit 2 longs runs yesterday but for the last month + they can't consistently gain yardage on the ground. Too many stuffs and negative runs leaving them in 2nd and 3rd and longs which isn't a sustainable

I can't imagine that is helping the passing game.
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
62,396
New York City
FWIW, I think another pressure point is they've been unable to consistently run the ball for the past 4 games. Stevenson has 196 yards on 57 carries during that stretch, 3.44 YPC. He was over 5 YPC in the previous 6 games. Harris has been dealing with injury and did hit 2 longs runs yesterday but for the last month + they can't consistently gain yardage on the ground. Too many stuffs and negative runs leaving them in 2nd and 3rd and longs which isn't a sustainable

I can't imagine that is helping the passing game.
One or the other here. It could be that the passing game so not dangerous in stretching the field, teams can load up and focus on stopping Rham and Harris.

Also, if the line is horrendous in pass protect, it is likely it's not doing a great job at run blocking. Obviously they are different skills, but a line that is a sieve is a sieve.