I like Weber, but.......

[minibeaver]

He has this bad habit of losing his mind when we really need him to step up. This has been his m.o from day one. He hikes the ball and stares at Decker everytime. Physical tools he has, good legs and a strong arm, but he doesn't seem to see the field well at all. Do we just not have anyone that could compete with him for this spot? I'm not at the game and I don't see whether or not any other recievers are open. Any thoughts?

 

[Bronko Nagurski Gopher]

strong legs and a strong arm, but doesn't see the field well...reminds me of someone

He wears number 7 for the vikings........T-Jack!

 

[Monty519]

Decent QB play is hard to find just anywhere. Believe it or not, Weber's actually pretty darn good when you look around at what other teams are working with. Especially when you consider we have no semblance of a run game.

 

[Khaliq]

Jackson actually sees the field pretty well. He has an unfair reputation in the cities for being dumb when he's actually a pretty cerebral guy with a very solid grasp of the WCO. His problem is that he doesn't handle pressure well and he tends to panic. If he could ever get himself to calm down he could be a pretty solid QB.

 

[minibeaver]

God lovem, I live about ten miles from his Alma Mater, not known for it's academic prowess.

 

[GoAUpher]

He has this bad habit of losing his mind when we really need him to step up. This has been his m.o from day one. He hikes the ball and stares at Decker everytime. Physical tools he has, good legs and a strong arm, but he doesn't seem to see the field well at all. Do we just not have anyone that could compete with him for this spot? I'm not at the game and I don't see whether or not any other recievers are open. Any thoughts?

While the Decker mind meld has definitely been a problem for Weber, he showed great improvement in this regard last week. He spread the ball around, he checked down to other receivers, and he didn't force it to Decker through triple coverage or anything ridiculous like that.

 

[Maximus]

He has this bad habit of losing his mind when we really need him to step up. This has been his m.o from day one. He hikes the ball and stares at Decker everytime. Physical tools he has, good legs and a strong arm, but he doesn't seem to see the field well at all. Do we just not have anyone that could compete with him for this spot? I'm not at the game and I don't see whether or not any other recievers are open. Any thoughts?

If I had Eric Decker on my team, I'd stare at him too (on the football field of course).

He didn't lose his mind when he was 15 of 18 to come back against Air Force in the second half.

He didn't lose his mind on the 14 play 79 yard drive to tie the game in the final minute at Syracuse.

 

[minibeaver]

There was some improvement, that was obvious all in the face of heavy pressure most plays, but what about his late game pics over the years?

 

[Khaliq]

There was some improvement, that was obvious all in the face of heavy pressure most plays, but what about his late game pics over the years?

It's hard to draw too many conclusions based on late game interceptions. Generally when you're in a situation where the other team knows you're going to pass and you need to cover a lot of ground quickly you almost have to throw into tighter coverage than you would normally, and if that's the case a lot of QBs would rather do that to a receiver like Decker who has the best chance of fighting for the ball.

I don't really have a problem with that.

 

[Monty519]

As far as staring down Decker, it's probably his first read, so he goes there frequently. And, since Decker seems to get open quite frequently, he ends up throwing there as well. I definitely think the spreading of the ball has improved.

 

[GoAUpher]

As far as staring down Decker, it's probably his first read, so he goes there frequently. And, since Decker seems to get open quite frequently, he ends up throwing there as well. I definitely think the spreading of the ball has improved.

Exactly. This was a bigger problem when he'd look at Decker, see him double covered, and keep staring him down until he forced it in. Maybe he'll regress to that. But for now, he's showing improvement in this regard.

 

[Schnoodler]

Outside of the terrible start at syracuse Weber's completion percentage is just fine. Shouldn't we base this on some sort of objectivity. So what if Decker gets the ball alot. He gets open alot. He has very sure hands. It's a good thing. Just because Weber has such a great target in Decker doesn't mean hes' a bad QB. It's weird logic.

 

[GoAUpher]

Outside of the terrible start at syracuse Weber's completion percentage is just fine. Shouldn't we base this on some sort of objectivity. So what if Decker gets the ball alot. He gets open alot. He has very sure hands. It's a good thing. Just because Weber has such a great target in Decker doesn't mean hes' a bad QB. It's weird logic.

No, no, no. Generalizations work much better.

 

[dpodoll68]

Jackson actually sees the field pretty well. He has an unfair reputation in the cities for being dumb when he's actually a pretty cerebral guy with a very solid grasp of the WCO. His problem is that he doesn't handle pressure well and he tends to panic. If he could ever get himself to calm down he could be a pretty solid QB.

I hope you're joking.

I'm as big a Vikings fan as anybody, but the only thing keeping Jackson from being a HOF QB is that he has the same IQ and football savvy as a box of toothpicks.

Weber is much better in terms of his read and recognition ability (comparatively speaking), but he still has that troubling tendency of locking in on Decker too often. I'm not saying he shouldn't be throwing to Decker (perhaps even more than he already does), but it makes things much easier if he checks off his other receivers. Seriously, it's almost comical - you can take note of which side of the field Decker is lined up on, and more often than not, Weber will immediately look at him as soon as he takes the snap, and never look away.

 

[anticallihan]

He has this bad habit of losing his mind when we really need him to step up. This has been his m.o from day one. He hikes the ball and stares at Decker everytime. Physical tools he has, good legs and a strong arm, but he doesn't seem to see the field well at all. Do we just not have anyone that could compete with him for this spot? I'm not at the game and I don't see whether or not any other recievers are open. Any thoughts?

Totally lost his mind during that last drive at Syracuse.

 

[minibeaver]

He did much better in spreading it around vs Cal, and I never said hitting Decker everytime is a problem, pass to him all damn day who cares as long as its productive. The problem comes when hes staring at a covered Decker when theres a wide open Tow-Arnett or Stoudemire and he takes a sack or worse throws a pic. It's not about spreading the ball around for spreadings' sake, it's about hitting the open guy right away and seeing the field better, and being a more effective quarterback.

 

[GoAUpher]

He did much better in spreading it around vs Cal, and I never said hitting Decker everytime is a problem, pass to him all damn day who cares as long as its productive. The problem comes when hes staring at a covered Decker when theres a wide open Tow-Arnett or Stoudemire and he takes a sack or worse throws a pic. It's not about spreading the ball around for spreadings' sake, it's about hitting the open guy right away and seeing the field better, and being a more effective quarterback.

I agree more with this point. He has missed better open targets because of the fact that Decker is typically the first look. Maybe that's the downside of having a stud receiver you can rely on?

 

[Bayfieldgopher]

FWIW, I did a quick count of Weber targets. A few of the incomplete passes did not state the intended receiver. I know I missed a couple here and there but.......

Decker-43; Stoudamire-18; Green-12; T/A-9; Bennett-6; Hoese-5; Eskridge-3; Carpenter-1; Kuznia-1

This is not a surprise and, assuming Decker stays healthy, this trend will likely continue. After three years, what we see is what we will get from Weber and Decker will be the man 40+% of the time.

 

[upchurch]

He is slow in reacting to a potential sack. And once he starts to try moving away, he is slow afoot. No quickness.

 

[Schnoodler]

it's tough, he could bolt early but then he'd get trashed because he doesn't stay in the pocket long enough. Bottom line is we need improvment on the Oline.

 

[monk10]

It'd be interesting if we had a stud running back if so many people would be wishing we would give some of the other players more touches.

 

[dpodoll68]

It'd be interesting if we had a stud running back if so many people would be wishing we would give some of the other players more touches.

Last time I checked, there usually aren't defenders standing between the QB and RB when he hands/pitches him the ball.

Nice attempt at a feeble analogy, though.

 

[monk10]

Last time I checked, there usually aren't defenders standing between the QB and RB when he hands/pitches him the ball.

Nice attempt at a feeble analogy, though.

Nice try dismissing the purpose of giving your best player the most touches.

Given our QB's completion percentage, one could argue that there aren't defenders standing between our QB and WR.

 

[Steve French]

It seems to me that our QB is more comfortable while moving and it sure seems like his throws are more accurate. He doesn't seem to react to pressure that quickly, so I sure would like to see more designed rollouts where he has the option to take off for a few yards instead of taking a sack. I haven't watched any of the games a second time, so I might be victim of selective memory, but that's what I've been telling a my son-in-law and a couple other gopher buddies of mine.

 

[Khaliq]

The only problem with designed rollouts is you're cutting your viable receiving options in half. If the aim is better ball distribution, rollouts are somewhat counter to that.

 

[monk10]

The only trouble with rollouts is that the defense only has to defend half the field. However given our o-line, it seems like we are on an unintended rollout everyother time we drop back, so in that case it would be a good idea.

EDIT: SLOW TO POST IN MY OLD AGE! .

 

[dpodoll68]

Nice try dismissing the purpose of giving your best player the most touches.

Given our QB's completion percentage, one could argue that there aren't defenders standing between our QB and WR.

The problem is that even a basic understanding of football renders your entire argument invalid.

The WR not only has to deal with his coverage (single-, double-, triple-, zone, bracket, etc., etc.), but he is also dependent upon the QB to get him the ball. When your QB forces the ball to him, he is not only likely to be looking away from better (read: more open) options on that play, but he is also likely to cause a turnover, which are more easily advanced for big gains than a RB turnover (read: fumble).

The RB is dependent only on the QB to give him the ball (which is failsafe 99.5% of the time), and the other 9 players to block. When your RB is going well, no one is going to complain if he gets the ball 40-50 times a game. If he's not going well, he gets benched. Pretty simple. When have you seen a WR get benched for not getting the ball thrown to him? Exactly.

A good college RB will carry the ball upwards of 300 times in a season. Even the best college WR will catch the ball maybe 100 times in a season. There is a reason for this.

Your whole argument is akin to complaining that we need to bench our DT because he's not getting enough interceptions.

 

[monk10]

The problem is that even a basic understanding of football renders your entire argument invalid.

The WR not only has to deal with his coverage (single-, double-, triple-, zone, bracket, etc., etc.), but he is also dependent upon the QB to get him the ball. When your QB forces the ball to him, he is not only likely to be looking away from better (read: more open) options on that play, but he is also likely to cause a turnover, which are more easily advanced for big gains than a RB turnover (read: fumble).

The RB is dependent only on the QB to give him the ball (which is failsafe 99.5% of the time), and the other 9 players to block. When your RB is going well, no one is going to complain if he gets the ball 40-50 times a game. If he's not going well, he gets benched. Pretty simple. When have you seen a WR get benched for not getting the ball thrown to him? Exactly.

A good college RB will carry the ball upwards of 300 times in a season. Even the best college WR will catch the ball maybe 100 times in a season. There is a reason for this.

Your whole argument is akin to complaining that we need to bench our DT because he's not getting enough interceptions.

I'll let you go research some basic football philosophy around why teams are going to a two-back system instead of letting a stud RB carry it. Hopefully it isn't too complicated for you to understand.

When you are done with that, you can move into give your best play maker the ball as many times as you can during a game, which should include a side lesson of not letting a defense take away your playmaker.

Now think about what you wrote. The best receiver will only get 100 catches a year. So if Decker gets 100 catches, was Weber staring him down too much (40% of completions sent his way), or did we design our offense around trying to get our best receiver as many catches as we can.

 

[Rick Mons]

He is slow in reacting to a potential sack. And once he starts to try moving away, he is slow afoot. No quickness.

Gosh, I was sure that was Weber in the Cal game when he avoided a sack for a safety and then avoided a second tackle on the same down for a loss. But IIRC, the 3rd tackle was successful for throwing Weber for a loss. It's all on Weber, I guess. ...

If it weren't for the Mounds View Cabal©, Adam would probably be the 3rd string-string QB. After all, neither Fisch nor Brewster really want to win, so they stick with that ham-footed slow guy out of inertia I guess. ...