QB experts, do Love’s fundamentals look better?

[ThunderDan]

Is that Love or a blown coverage though? My understanding is Aaron doesn't throw over the middle often but I would be shocked if he wouldn't make that throw.

Seriously, you are asking this question. ARod has been completely averse to throwing over the middle. I can't count how many times in the game day thread people commented on the WR, RB, TE running across the middle wide open at the 1st down marker and ARod going for the 20 yard sideline throw instead.

[call_me_ishmael]

Seriously, you are asking this question. ARod has been completely averse to throwing over the middle. I can't count how many times in the game day thread people commented on the WR, RB, TE running across the middle wide open at the 1st down marker and ARod going for the 20 yard sideline throw instead.

Sure, no doubt he doesn't always do it. But this throw to 9 was wide open, it's not like Rodgers _never_ does it. I have little doubt Rodgers would have made this throw.

This data driven read implies he throws over the middle on ~25% of throws, which is much lower than the league leaders at ~50%

https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/by-the-numbers/2020/5/7/21247582/aaron-rodgers-packers-pass-direction-middle-of-field-shot-selection-2019

[Fritz]

Sure, no doubt he doesn't always do it. But this throw to 9 was wide open, it's not like Rodgers _never_ does it. I have little doubt Rodgers would have made this throw.

This data driven read implies he throws over the middle on ~25% of throws, which is much lower than the league leaders at ~50%

https://www.acmepackingcompany.com/b...selection-2019

Given that, I suppose if you're an opposing team's DC, you'd edge your coverage over to the sidelines, figuring unless someone was running wide, wide open over the middle, Arod wasn't going to go there. Makes Adams's over-the-back-shoulder grabs even more amazing.

[run pMc]

Given that, I suppose if you're an opposing team's DC, you'd edge your coverage over to the sidelines, figuring unless someone was running wide, wide open over the middle, Arod wasn't going to go there. Makes Adams's over-the-back-shoulder grabs even more amazing.

I think he eschews throws in the middle of the field because they are more likely to be intercepted there. They are easier throws, but there are usually more lurking defenders to watch for.
The number of sideline throws Rodgers has been able to complete is incredible, but I think his accuracy at throwing them has diminished in recent years.

Avoiding use of the MOF is making it harder for yourself and your offense. I think JL will use it much more, but I also think he'll throw more picks.

Also, throwing a deep sideline pass on 3rd and short is stupid unless you drew someone offside or you know you can convert on 4th down a la Jalen Hurts butt push.

[sharpe1027]

Interceptions stats are often overrated. I'll take occasional interceptions in exchange for multiple drive saving throws any day of the week. Most of the time, an interception leads to the same result as a poor punt.

[Fritz]

I do recall in the KC game a couple years ago that Love sure did seem like he had a long, slow windup. Sure, I've watched Rodgers for years, but I've seen a few other QB's over my football-watching life, and Love seemed super slow. I don't recall if he looked quicker against Philly; I imagine so.

[texaspackerbacker]

Wrong. Sharpe. One of if not the primary thing that makes Rodgers the GOAT is the mindset not to throw interceptions. We can only hope Love (if indeed he will be the next Packer QB) absorbed that and is approximately the same.

[Joemailman]

I do recall in the KC game a couple years ago that Love sure did seem like he had a long, slow windup. Sure, I've watched Rodgers for years, but I've seen a few other QB's over my football-watching life, and Love seemed super slow. I don't recall if he looked quicker against Philly; I imagine so.

I think it's much quicker. Not like Rodgers, but a big improvement.

[sharpe1027]

https://www.footballperspective.com/...tions-in-2019/

Some pretty good arguments that sacks have more effect on a game than picks.

[sharpe1027]

Team records when finishing a game with 0 sacks:

2019: 49-16 (0.754)
2014-2018: 225-86-1 (0.723)
1990s: 472-166-0 (0.740)

Team records when finishing a game with 0 INTs:

2019: 153-90-1 (0.629)

2014-2018: 770-378-3 (0.670)

1990s: 1157-522-1 (0.689

[Fritz]

So the key would be mostly having a killer offensive line. Plus a QB who was squirrelly enough to avoid the sack.

[sharpe1027]

So the key would be mostly having a killer offensive line. Plus a QB who was squirrelly enough to avoid the sack.

Hard to say just from the base statistics. Fewer sack is sometimes the result of other things like a good running game or how the offense is setup and run.

[Fritz]

I just thought of something: the offensive line coach should make any offensive lineman who gives up a sack in a game wear . . .

wait for it . . .

a sackcloth the next week at practice.

[RashanGary]

Sacks happen more often at the end of the game when you’re losing and have to pass too. So if you have a zero sack game, you’re likely to have been ahead.

Zero sack games are less common. You probably have a superior OL/QB/Running game if you give up zero sacks.


I’m not surprised zero sack games lead to more wins than zero interception games.

[sharpe1027]

Sacks happen more often at the end of the game when you’re losing and have to pass too. So if you have a zero sack game, you’re likely to have been ahead.

Zero sack games are less common. You probably have a superior OL/QB/Running game if you give up zero sacks.


I’m not surprised zero sack games lead to more wins than zero interception games.

Can't you say the same thing for interceptions?