What measure makes Jameis a poor quarterback? (1 Viewer)

[sleepingbunch]

Jameis historically turns it over a lot and takes unnecessary chances. He makes bad decisions and critical mistakes under pressure. Awesome arm though. His impressive throws are very impressive, and then he will miss the linebacker dropping into coverage.

The Saints are a premier all-around NFL team talent wise, so at QB we are less likely to play someone like Jameis who has always been high risk high reward.

With Taysom, we know at least that the run game will be dominant, and we hope that Taysom doesnt make many errant throws.

If we had our bad defense of old, and the Saints needed to put up 40 or so points to have a chance to win, Winston might be the better choice. With how well the defense is playing right now, Taysom is the better choice utilizing a ball control offense.

 

[ElGatoNegro]

Well let's hope after playing 20 years he throws less interceptions and also playing in a dink and funk offense the majority of that time tends to cut down.
I'm not a jameis fan but I post because, that is the only thing yall point out EVERYTIME someone says give him a chance with a new coach and new offense. Granted brady isn't going to throw 30 but doesn't it say something about the system when he has already matched his total for last year?
And please DO NOT RESPOND, if all you can say is but, but, but, 30 picks

There's a lot more than 30 picks. There is also 18 fumbles, a 32-48 record, sexual assualt allegations, shoplifting, repeated bad decision making and the fact that no NFL teams were willing to offer him a proper contract to be a starter...

 

[ccss]

Just took a look at fumbles during their first 5 years:

Brett Favre. 52
Jameis Winston. 50
Tom Brady. 47
P. Manning. 27

I'm sure the number of sacks they suffered had a bearing on the number of fumbles - but I'm not going there. I do know, however, that out of the 50 fumbles by Jameis, only 23 were lost to the other team. Enough, done and out. Think what you want.

 

[TribuneUK]

Excuse me, sir, but I really resent that implication. I have absolutely no inclination toward that sort of thing. Is that the sort of accusation that you make when you don't have a reasonable response? Who exactly placed you in the position of being the decider about who fit that category? I am a Saints fan from the beginning, was around when discussions were going on about a team being added in New Orleans, vividly remember the first kick-off and suffered through all the losing seasons, always looking forward to next year. During that time I have witnessed a lot of people throwing around criticisms, some deserved and some not. Believe me during those lean years lots of criticism was heaped on Saints players and the team as a whole, so I've become a little defensive about misplaced criticism. My whole intent was to generate some discussion, based on objective information, about how anyone arrived at a decision that Jameis Winston was a poor quarterback. Who decided that any of the information was widely discredited - are you some kind of football authority? People have offered good, solid responses, both in support and opposing, but all in all I haven't seen any decisive information to show Jameis anything less than a good quarterback with potential of becoming something more. When compared to others in the NFL who went on to have great careers, he stacks up pretty favorably from what I can see, and I would be the first to admit that I'm no expert in any sense of the word. I have been around for a very long time, and if you notice have not been actively involved in discussions because of this exact kind of thing. It doesn't take a whole lot of effort to be civil and objective, try it.

I'm sorry, but I've called it as I see it. It's taken you until the tenth page as far as I can see before you actually tried to properly respond to a counter argument*.

Prior to that you just trotted out the same interception comparison as your first post, and did so a number of times. That's not discussion.

And it may benefit you to read and give your thoughts on the facts you were presented a few pages back, regarding just how much higher the INT numbers were in those previous eras you keep comparing this player with. The same post highlights just how far above the current norm 30 picks are as well.

There's also the statistical analysis of his deep throws that were presented, showing him dead last in the NFL.

There were numerous other valid responses to your call for reasons why people consider him poor (to date) and these deserved better responses if you wanted discussion. And in truth, you have every chance to still have that discussion, as long as you don't maintain this rather entrenched position you've taken up so far.

* The career fumbles debate. Sadly, comparing only fumbles lost for this guy with all fumbles by other QBs isn't actually an equal comparison.

In totality, the guy combines a number of negative outcomes that have been rather overwhelming. Slice it any way you like, you can't find any player in their first five years with that many fumbles, interceptions and losses. And that's not good, it's poor.

FYI my opinion remains one of good luck to the guy, he can only get better. I'm hoping for a Trent Dilfer style renaissance into a reasonable game manager, and maybe more.

 

[Stalwart385]

I still see this thread going and still see the OP trying to push his original statement.

The argument is flat wrong. The year in front of the stats is just as important as the stats themselves. Just as Gardner Minshew isn't better than Joe Montana.

I'll post the actual relevant numbers Winston put up in a sensible manner. Him ranked against his peers. (Green = Top 10, Red = Bottom 10)




Let's please be real.

(The headers should be Sack% and Fmbl)

 

[Jesse Custer]

My two cents: we don't know if Jameis is Ryan Tannehill or if he's Cam Newton. Tannehill looks like an entirely different player in Tennessee whereas Newton is pretty much the same streaky egotist in New England that he was in Carolina. It mostly comes down to whether or not Jameis has his head screwed on straight. Past history would point to no, but people can change. I totally understand Taysom getting the nod over Jameis.

 

[Groovepro]

This is a reiteration of what many have posted, but I am just not a fan of Winston's decision making. Even with some breakdowns of the single game touting him to have made the "right read", he didn't. The one play where he checked down to Kamara coming out sums it all up for me. He had the WR on top (corner had outside leverage even in pre-snap read and if you know the route he is running, he had him from the get go, didn't pull the trigger that could've been a TD since safety was still spying middle). Cook came into a soft zone, which would be his 2nd read and he had him on a quick read in a spot with a RAC lane. He dumped off to Kamara who does what he does and made things happen for a first down. No need to make that play that tough to gain yardage. He has had some great, athletic pass catchers who on deep balls MADE a fantastic play on the ball. He doesn't extend plays. Hill does have an "IT" factor. He tries to MAKE something happen, not "hope for the best" and have to rely on a playmaker to make an amazing play to bail out a bad throw or read. Players do LIKE Winston and rally around him because of his personality.

Winston has HAD good skill players around him. Young in TB doesn't compare. Young was raw and in an organization that was horribly run, bad coaching and schemes. His best weapon was Jimmie Giles who had a good year, despite being underused (for his pass catching ability). In 86 he held out, got benched and went to another team, never to see his full spectrum of what he could do. Young was a kid and was only in that debacle of an organization for 2 years. SF had a front office that only accepted excellence, great coaches, great teachers and a roster of HOF's to learn from.

Favre had the "IT" factor. Stats are deceiving when out of context. Yes, Favre was a gunslinger and took chances, but those were the "this is our only option and chance" and he would take it upon himself to try to make a play. He didn't do that every play and "hope for the best". There is a huge difference between potential and kinetic energy. Manning was one of the smartest game managers ever.

You can at least see glimpses of greatness with those with high sacks, high INT's, etc. Wins are one of the best stats you can look at. It is a team game, but if your QB is taking as many positive plays away with negative plays in key situations, are you considered "good"...no. Brooks was statistically one of the Saints' better QBs...nuff said.

Body mechanics, pocket presence, decision making and an ability to "make something happen" in the right situations without putting your team in a hole, are key. He isn't Jeff George, but something still isn't clicking with his decision making. Yes, he didn't have a full offseason, but been the clear cut #2 with CSP and Brees...there should be just at least a little more there with his development. Not playing to lose is not playing to win, but has to translate to WINS. I am still not seeing that in Winston.

 

[Ihartsaints]

"Hill is the future. Embrace it"

So after nearly 15 yrs of working with a guy like Brees, u really think CSP is THAT impressed with a guy who @ 30, is still pretty much tryna learn the basics of being an NFL calibur QB????? LoL

Summa y'all need to chill with ur enthusiasm for Hill. After 3 yrs & 2 former starters @ QB signed during his time, he's still being "given a chance" or "evaluated" SMDH. That in no way indicates he's "the future" here or on any team's roster as a QB quite frankly

I'm pretty sure there is nothing Taysom can do that would change the mind of the "Never Taysom" crowd.

 

[boutte]

Jameis went 6 for 6 on his first 6 passes in the Tampa game, all well-placed. If you saw the statistics above, he actually had a lower average per year interception rate than either Peyton Manning or Dan Marino during their first five years at quarterback in the NFL and they didn't become duds. The rest of his stats are very close to the best in the NFL. Yes he had a year with 30 interceptions, Peyton had one with 28, Marino had 24 more than once, and Brett Farve had his own trials. In fact, over the 5 year period, Jameis had about 12 fewer interceptions than Peyton, almost a years worth. Jameis has thrown for over 5,000 yards in a single season, only about 8 quarterbacks have done that- ever - in the NFL. Not a knock on Taysom at all, he's a great guy and may become a great quarterback, but Jameis Winston is a good, smart quarterback who could become great himself, his record supports that fact. Is that so hard to accept?

Could, would , should, maybe, might, hopefully........... I can accept that. Unless it's Taysom in which case it's obvious that the guy isn't talented enough. Why can't you people see that? He's obviously just been lucky that Sean doesn't know a good QB when he sees one.

 

[ccss]

I still see this thread going and still see the OP trying to push his original statement.

The argument is flat wrong. The year in front of the stats is just as important as the stats themselves. Just as Gardner Minshew isn't better than Joe Montana.

I'll post the actual relevant numbers Winston put up in a sensible manner. Him ranked against his peers. (Green = Top 10, Red = Bottom 10)




Let's please be real.

(The headers should be Sack% and Fmbl)

I had hoped to be done with this thread, but since you complained about my lack of response, I felt compelled to show you the courtesy of responding to your latest. I can do nothing other than agree that if we place Jameis in the box you illustrated, then he is, obviously, a horrible quarterback.

I don't know your age but someone who is 30 years old would naturally consider 20 years to be a huge time span. Someone like me, with 7+ decades under my belt, not so much. So, you may understand why I would tend to discount the span between Peyton and Jameis.

I know that the game has changed over the years but it's hard to take a snapshot at any given time and try to account for the differences to make a comparison. That's why I ignored the "era" and just compared the raw numbers. If we were comparing to someone in the 1940-1960 time frame a consideration may be appropriate.

My comparison was simple - how many balls were thrown and how many caught and then comparing Jameis' performance to a known great quarterback - yes - I probably could have tried to account for such things as the proper inflation of the football at the time, but I didn't. In my mind 20 years is just a dipper-full in a bucket.

And, in my snapshot, Jameis fared pretty well, in yours, not so much. I understand that Jameis will never be a Peyton Manning or even begin to touch the heights of the goat himself, Drew Brees, he is more in the mold of a Brett Favre, and I still think he will have a great career. You have a different view and I respect that fact. It's not beyond my comprehension that you could be right. We'll have to wait and see.

One other thing I need to address - I did show the total number of fumbles by Jameis - right there with the list of other quarterback's fumbles - not trying to cover up anything.

 

[Bob1234]

There's a lot more than 30 picks. There is also 18 fumbles, a 32-48 record, sexual assualt allegations, shoplifting, repeated bad decision making and the fact that no NFL teams were willing to offer him a proper contract to be a starter...

That right there is just wrong. The steelers made an offer. It may be a sheetty person, the sexual allegations but that has nothing to do with throwing a football. Everybody loves Ezekiel Elliott but he already has 6 fumbles this year,i guess the cowboys should cut him. Also no one offered drew brees a contract, different circumstances, but the point is it only takes one team. Everything yall point to as reasons why to not try to resurrect his career is laughable because some of the people everyone talks about being great have done the same things.

 

[Stalwart385]

I had hoped to be done with this thread, but since you complained about my lack of response, I felt compelled to show you the courtesy of responding to your latest. I can do nothing other than agree that if we place Jameis in the box you illustrated, then he is, obviously, a horrible quarterback.

I don't know your age but someone who is 30 years old would naturally consider 20 years to be a huge time span. Someone like me, with 7+ decades under my belt, not so much. So, you may understand why I would tend to discount the span between Peyton and Jameis.

I know that the game has changed over the years but it's hard to take a snapshot at any given time and try to account for the differences to make a comparison. That's why I ignored the "era" and just compared the raw numbers. If we were comparing to someone in the 1940-1960 time frame a consideration may be appropriate.

My comparison was simple - how many balls were thrown and how many caught and then comparing Jameis' performance to a known great quarterback - yes - I probably could have tried to account for such things as the proper inflation of the football at the time, but I didn't. In my mind 20 years is just a dipper-full in a bucket.

And, in my snapshot, Jameis fared pretty well, in yours, not so much. I understand that Jameis will never be a Peyton Manning or even begin to touch the heights of the goat himself, Drew Brees, he is more in the mold of a Brett Favre, and I still think he will have a great career. You have a different view and I respect that fact. It's not beyond my comprehension that you could be right. We'll have to wait and see.

One other thing I need to address - I did show the total number of fumbles by Jameis - right there with the list of other quarterback's fumbles - not trying to cover up anything.

My argument is not what Jameis can be but what he has been. Payton is a great coach, we have a good offense. Maybe thats enouh to fix him, maybe not. I'm not a QB guru. I just wont ignore his past is not pretty.

I tend to think we wont find out though. Not as an indictment on Jameis, just the situation wont give him much more time here.

As far as the span of time. It does feel like Peyton was just playing yesterday. The issue isn't the number of years though but simply how he compares to his peers. That determines if they were a great, ok or not really starting quality. You can do the same excecise with Farve and see the same starck contrast.

 

[Grilled Brees Sandwich]

Lord some of you are so miserable.

Are we really up to 10 pages of bashing one of our own players who came here to learn with Brees and SP and has been a complete team player. All he has done is help make sure we finished off the 49ers when Drew went out. He ahas been a completed professional and very supportive of the decision to give TH the ball. No pouting. No whining to media. Still fired up and a part of team on sidelines. His teammates all like him.

And yet here many of you are bashing him, a Saints player, minimizing both him as a person and his career, which has not been near as bad as you make it. He was not a bust. NFL bust at QB don’t leave their teams at 27 as the all time leaders in TD and yards passing, make pro bowls or have 121 TD passes after 5 years. He got pushed out for Tom freakin Brady and he wanted (and still wants to be) a Saint. He idolized Drew Brees growing up in Alabama

But go ahead keep on bashing one of your own players who has done nothing to deserve it.

 

[ElGatoNegro]

That right there is just wrong. The steelers made an offer. It may be a sheetty person, the sexual allegations but that has nothing to do with throwing a football. Everybody loves Ezekiel Elliott but he already has 6 fumbles this year,i guess the cowboys should cut him. Also no one offered drew brees a contract, different circumstances, but the point is it only takes one team. Everything yall point to as reasons why to not try to resurrect his career is laughable because some of the people everyone talks about being great have done the same things.

Ye, but 0 of them were stupid enough to try eat there fingers before a game. I just don't think jameis has the mental processing ability or impulse control to be a good qb. Whether it's grabbing crotches, stealing crab legs or throwing into coverage, he's going to imagine the best case scenario and go for it, regardless of what the consequences of failure may be.

 

[Stalwart385]

Lord some of you are so miserable.

Are we really up to 10 pages of bashing one of our own players who came here to learn with Brees and SP and has been a complete team player. All he has done is help make sure we finished off the 49ers when Drew went out. He ahas been a completed professional and very supportive of the decision to give TH the ball. No pouting. No whining to media. Still fired up and a part of team on sidelines. His teammates all like him.

And yet here many of you are bashing him, a Saints player, minimizing both him as a person and his career, which has not been near as bad as you make it. He was not a bust. NFL bust at QB don’t leave their teams at 27 as the all time leaders in TD and yards passing, make pro bowls or have 121 TD passes after 5 years. He got pushed out for Tom freakin Brady and he wanted (and still wants to be) a Saint. He idolized Drew Brees growing up in Alabama

But go ahead keep on bashing one of your own players who has done nothing to deserve it.

I am not bashing Winston. I'm simply stating what the facts are. People are trying to put his past career on a pedestal. Some even so far as saying hes our plug and play future. I'm pointing out that he was a bottom 10 QB and must improve. Further that his past in no way reflects any greats before him.

We can be real about where our players are and still hope they succeed in the future.

The length of this thread speaks more to how people continue to deny that Winston past career is not pretty. He's been threatened to lose his job several times and the stats reflect why.