Back to Davis?

[jrry32]

actually Stu the average height of ALL NFL QB's is 6ft 2 " this he's too short is a manufactured arguing point, Hill isn't tall enough to throw over people either ,he has to have passing lanes JUST like Davis.

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.co...oes-height-matter-for-nfl-quarterbacks/22067/

It's not a manufactured arguing point. You can throw out stats but I'll continue to let my observations based on games be what I derive my opinion from. Davis's unwillingness to climb the ladder in the pocket and his tendency to bail out of the pocket along with his struggles identifying both defenders and WRs within 5-7 yards over the middle are directly related to his lack of height.(along with his lack of composure)

P.S. that article shows exactly why you shouldn't pay a bit of attention to people that rely on stats for their analysis.

P.S.S. the average height for QBs that started at least one game in 2014 is 6'3.5" while the median height is 6'4" so the 6'2" assertion being made isn't accurate.

 

[jrry32]

Wasn't Warner 'only' 6'2"?

I tend to think the whole height thing is a non-issue also. Seems to me it's one of things where more is probably always better, but not having 'prototype' height isn't necessarily a detriment.

The height thing isn't a non-issue. Aaron Donald is a 6'1" 290ish pound DT. For the vast majority of DTs in the NFL, that size would be an issue. For Donald, it is not because he learned how to compensate. Warner, Brees, Rodgers, Romo, etc. all these guys know how to compensate for whatever height deficiencies they have. Davis does not. And that's why his height is an issue. Plus, Davis is 0.5" to 1" shorter than all those guys except Brees. While some will dismiss that as trivial, it does matter. Especially when you watch Davis play. It's clear that he has major issues seeing the field over the OL and DL.

It's like saying having a mediocre or weak arm isn't an issue/detriment. It is. But guys like Peyton Manning, Chad Pennington, Joe Montana, etc. learned how to work around it.

Davis has not learned how to work around his lack of height. And you can see how it affects everything he does. That and his lack of composure. He isn't comfortable staying in the pocket, he struggles finding throwing lanes, he doesn't want to climb the ladder, and he struggles reading the short to intermediate middle of the field. It's an issue...a major issue.

People can throw out a million examples of successful QBs that were 6'2" or shorter, you're not going to change my opinion. Those guys weren't Davis. I've watched enough QBing in my time and know enough about the position to be able to tell when a guy is having issues trying to compensate for his lack of height and field vision.

 

[RamFan503]

And Warner had it figured out from day one. Professionals cut him. He himself refused to go in because he wasn't ready by his own estimation. But I suppose Davis is a three year vet and should have all this figured out already. And Davis' 6'2" is shorter than anyone else's 6'2" - it just is. And we can see everything a QB is capable of after a few games with an offensive line that was ... well? Offensive.

P.S. that article shows exactly why you shouldn't pay a bit of attention to people that rely on stats for their analysis.

You mean like being too short?

 

[Dodgersrf]

It's not a manufactured arguing point. You can throw out stats but I'll continue to let my observations based on games be what I derive my opinion from. Davis's unwillingness to climb the ladder in the pocket and his tendency to bail out of the pocket along with his struggles identifying both defenders and WRs within 5-7 yards over the middle are directly related to his lack of height.(along with his lack of composure)

P.S. that article shows exactly why you shouldn't pay a bit of attention to people that rely on stats for their analysis.

P.S.S. the average height for QBs that started at least one game in 2014 is 6'3.5" while the median height is 6'4" so the 6'2" assertion being made isn't accurate.

What pocket? Our oline has been absolutely dominated by the better defenses in the league.

 

[jrry32]

And Warner had it figured out from day one. Professionals cut him. He himself refused to go in because he wasn't ready by his own estimation. But I suppose Davis is a three year vet and should have all this figured out already. And Davis' 6'2" is shorter than anyone else's 6'2" - it just is. And we can see everything a QB is capable of after a few games with an offensive line that was ... well? Offensive.

You mean like being too short?

At some point, the excuses for Davis have to stop. The guy got his shot. He got a better shot than the vast majority of players in his position get. And he blew it. He wasn't good enough. He didn't earn more time. He didn't improve. He didn't fix his problems. He continued to get gradually worse and drug the team down with him.

Davis isn't actually 6'2". That's the thing. They're rounding up on his height. He checked in at 6'1.5" at the combine.

What is it going to take for you to give up on the guy? Even Fisher moved on from him because he saw the atrocious performances he put in against San Francisco and Arizona. The guy was in over his head.

I was hoping he was the next Warner or Bulger too. But he's not. Austin Davis is...

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWmQbk5h86w

 

[Thordaddy]

It's not a manufactured arguing point. You can throw out stats but I'll continue to let my observations based on games be what I derive my opinion from. Davis's unwillingness to climb the ladder in the pocket and his tendency to bail out of the pocket along with his struggles identifying both defenders and WRs within 5-7 yards over the middle are directly related to his lack of height.(along with his lack of composure)

P.S. that article shows exactly why you shouldn't pay a bit of attention to people that rely on stats for their analysis.

P.S.S. the average height for QBs that started at least one game in 2014 is 6'3.5" while the median height is 6'4" so the 6'2" assertion being made isn't accurate.

So why are you quot the stats from it?,Height P.S.S.S. is a statistic

Like it or not the average height of people NFL coaches have decided to retain at the position is 6'2" ,Kurt Warner 6'2" and a host of other high quality Qb's in the league past and present that do well at that height it only means something if you want it to ,how tall was last years Sb winning Qb? The loser?

Yes it's a manufactured point because there are too many people that height and less who have succeeded wildly. It is not an indicator that predicts failure.

 

[jrry32]

What pocket? Our oline has been absolutely dominated by the better defenses in the league.

You can sit back and put all the blame on the OL but it brings me back to what Chris Cooley was saying about RGIII, the QB can make people on the team look good and he can make them look bad. How many sacks did we give up against San Diego? Greg Robinson was dreadful in that game. Dwight Freeney owned the hell out of him. And yet we only gave up 1 sack(Liuget beating Robinson for the fumble TD).

People can sit here and say it was the OL holding Davis back but Davis did the OL absolutely no favors. Hill was dreadful against San Diego...but the one thing he didn't do is make his OL look bad. Austin Davis is FOURTH WORST in the NFL in average time to attempt. That means only three QBs hold the ball longer before attempting a pass. They are Russell Wilson, Geno Smith, and Tony Romo.

Russell Wilson can get away with it to an extent due to his mobility which also causes that number to be so high. Geno Smith got benched. Tony Romo has the best OL in the NFL which gives him ridiculous amounts of time. He had 9 seconds to throw on a play against the Giants. I kid you not, 9 seconds.

We do not have Dallas's OL. Austin Davis does not get the ball out quickly enough.

 

[jrry32]

So why are you quot the stats from it?,Height P.S.S.S. is a statistic

Like it or not the average height of people NFL coaches have decided to retain at the position is 6'2" ,Kurt Warner 6'2" and a host of other high quality Qb's in the league past and present that do well at that height it only means something if you want it to ,how tall was last years Sb winning Qb? The loser?

Yes it's a manufactured point because there are too many people that height and less who have succeeded wildly. It is not an indicator that predicts failure.

Like it or not, the QBs starting this year are an average of 6'3.5" and a median of 6'4". I don't care how tall the players riding the bench are.

It's a manufactured point, does height matter for WRs? There are 13 WRs in the NFL history to record 800+ receptions that are 6'0" or shorter. There are 2 WRs in NFL history to record 800+ receptions that are 6'4" or taller. Does that mean that it is better to 6'0" or shorter as a WR than to be 6'4" or taller? That's what the stats say. Or could it be that 6'4" or taller WRs are much more rare than 6'0" or shorter WRs?

Now, consider that sort of context and add it to the QB position. How good do you have to be to get a chance to start for a few years in the NFL at 6'1" or shorter at QB? NFL teams don't draft a lot of those guys highly. 6'4"/6'5" QBs...they draft a ton of them. That's what they look for.

There are better odds you'll end up with a bad 6'4" QB starting(cough Blaine Gabbert cough) than a bad 6'0" QB.

If you honestly think height doesn't matter at the QB position, you need to go take the time to talk to some football coaches. Because height means a lot.

The shorter you are, the more you have to do to compensate.

It's not a manufactured point. It's a well known thing in the football world. I don't worry about what predicts failure or success. You've chosen to create that strawman on your own. I worry about what a guy can and can't do. If you're Drew Brees and you can compensate for your lack of height, awesome. I'll think the world of you. But most of the guys can't. And you can see it in the way they play the game. Russell Wilson is actually a rare example of a guy who really can't compensate like Brees can...but he makes it work because he's such a good scrambler and such an accurate, poised, and intelligent QB.

I'm not worried about trying to take one attribute and predict failure. That's ridiculous. I watch the entirety of a guy's game. And watching the entirety of Austin Davis's game, he doesn't compensate for his lack of height well. He doesn't have the athleticism to get away with it. And he isn't decisive enough, composed enough, and strong armed enough to compensate for all those issues compounding on each other. What you have is a kid who has a lot of guts, a lot of heart but just not enough talent.

 

[Thordaddy]

Not gonna get vested in this , Davis is plenty tall to succeed that's my story and I'm sticking to it

 

[jrry32]

Not gonna get vested in this , Davis is plenty tall to succeed that's my story and I'm sticking to it

Stick to it. He's not succeeding. And one of the reasons why is his lack of height. Being tall enough to succeed doesn't mean much. Drew Brees and Russell Wilson prove that pretty much any NFL QB is tall enough to succeed in the technical sense. But some guys simply can't overcome their lack of height. Just like some DTs can't overcome their lack of size and yet Aaron Donald can. Yet using Aaron Donald as proof that those other DTs aren't being held back by their size and can overcome it doesn't mean much. Wes Welker ran a 4.65 40 and Anquan Boldin ran a 4.72 40. Most WRs that run a 4.65 to a 4.72 40 aren't fast enough to succeed in the NFL. Yet Welker and Boldin overcame it so it is possible those WRs could. And yet you wouldn't be wrong to say that their lack of speed was a big reason why they didn't have success if they couldn't compensate for it like Welker and Boldin have. Some players can compensate, some can't.

It being possible to overcome doesn't make a difference if you can't actually do it.

 

[Mojo Ram]

If you want a winner, call up Tebow.

My problem is we can't keep switching back and forth between two quarterbacks every time the other one makes a bad decision. What kind of message would that give the players? I think we're stuck with Hill for the rest of the season; for worse or for better.

We're stuck no matter what at QB this season. We're stuck with Hill. We're stuck with Davis. Oh and i agree that flip flopping is not a good idea. There are 5 games left. Hill should be the guy, unless he gets hurt and then Davis is the guy.

I understand the purpose of this board is discussion. Thats cool, but i'm still admittedly a bit baffled over the week to week debates over backup QB's. Davis is an inexperienced, high energy gunslinger with not a lot of natural skills. Hill is a veteran with not a lot of natural skills.
It's like going to a party and having to choose between NA beer or NA champagne.

 

[OnceARam]

Right now Hill gives us a better chance to win. That untimely interception was a product of Hill being benched earlier in the year. He was rusty (no chemistry with Hill). He tried to improvise (a result of panic).

As much as I like Davis, he was improvising the entire time. Sometimes that works and it's exciting. But more often than not, it doesn't work. (Brett Favre is the exception due to his arm strength and ability to move and take repeated hits.)

Look at the great QB's in this league. They aren't improvising. Rodgers could make throws blind. As could Brees. Those guys know where the pieces will be before they are there. They know where windows will be based on the looks they get, like our boy Warner. They trust that their receivers will make plays for them.

Hill sees the defense. Davis does not.

Perhaps Davis could learn to see the defense. Perhaps not. Perhaps he could use more film study. Practice. Time away from the spotlight to develop. Perhaps none of that will help and its just an internal structure of the mind that isn't measurable in shorts (i.e., ideal conditions).

If we're throwing in the towel; sure, start Davis. But I think that Fisher understands that playing Davis, in order to help his development, does not help the other 10 guys on the field with him. Especially our young, skilled-position guys.

We go with Hill until he breaks down or their is a more viable option on the roster.

Go Rams!

 

[Boffo97]

At the time, I was against making a switch from Davis to Hill. I didn't buy the notion that Hill (who I'm glad we have, and who has made some great plays here and there, but who I view as a journeyman JAG who doesn't have any remaining upside) "gave us a better chance to win" than Davis. Davis has proven he has a much higher ceiling than Hill. I don't know why Davis declined as badly as he did or how to fix it, but I don't buy the notion that his success was a fluke or that opposing defenses "figured him out".

BUT... now that the change is made, I would be against switching back. All Fisher would accomplish is undermining his own credibility with the rest of the team. And Davis would spend the rest of the year looking over his shoulder with no faith in anything Fisher had to say otherwise thanks to Fisher's brilliant idea to give him a vote of confidence then yanking him.

In the end analysis, the problems the team has go beyond the QB position, and neither is good enough to be what we need right now. That said, both are better than Keenum. If Keenum gets activated to the main roster and starts while either Hill or Davis is healthy, Fisher will be OBVIOUSLY flailing, and should put Kroenke on notice that he's likely not the answer at coach.

 

[RamFan503]

Davis isn't actually 6'2". That's the thing. They're rounding up on his height. He checked in at 6'1.5" at the combine.

And that is a Davis exclusive.

You are the one who led in with this too short business. We all know that it takes a different skill set depending on the size and strengths. Joe Montana for example was short and fairly weak. And no - I'm not comparing the two. I think we all get it. You don't like Davis and don't think he can amount to anything. I'm just not ready to give up on him just because he got whacked and harassed behind a very poorly performing O-line. And from what I saw on Sunday, I don't see enough left in Hill to make me think he is the better non-starting caliber QB on our team. Teams like SF and AZ pick off those ducks he threw. And I liked the Hill signing but wouldn't have if I saw what appears to be a severely declining ability to throw the medium to deep passes and the lumbering way he runs now.

I was only making height comparisons due to your dismissal of Davis saying he was too short. And BTW - the time a QB holds onto the ball is clearly not an obvious indicator if he is running either for his life or because the pocket broke down or in order to make plays. Obviously he needed to get rid of th ball on several plays where he didn't. He's not a great QB after 8 pro games. Shocker. No one expected much to begin with so it was easy for him to exceed expectations. But just because he started feeling the pass rush and made some terrible throws, doesn't mean he is washed up. And as long as he is wearing horns, I will pull for him to overcome the deficits he clearly has at this point in his young career.

Anyway, it's likely a moot point. I really doubt Fish is going to switch QBs again unless Hill goes down or has several games like Sunday. And with AZ and Seattle as the only two that are likely to pit us up against the kinds of defenses that will create real problems for a QB, I don't see it happening.

 

[VegasRam]

No dog in this fight, BUT (Stu), that fade to Bailey was PERFECT!:banana:

 

[RamFan503]

No dog in this fight, BUT (Stu), that fade to Bailey was PERFECT!:banana:

Yeah - I overstated the loft on that one. Still I think any QB hits that pass with a guy that wide open and I think that includes AD.

 

[Dodgersrf]

I'm for putting Davis back in. 9 wins won't get us to the playoffs. Let the kid play against some average defenses. We have nothing to lose at this point.
Maybe he improves.

 

[Ramathon]

The height thing isn't a non-issue. Aaron Donald is a 6'1" 290ish pound DT. For the vast majority of DTs in the NFL, that size would be an issue. For Donald, it is not because he learned how to compensate. Warner, Brees, Rodgers, Romo, etc. all these guys know how to compensate for whatever height deficiencies they have. Davis does not. And that's why his height is an issue. Plus, Davis is 0.5" to 1" shorter than all those guys except Brees. While some will dismiss that as trivial, it does matter. Especially when you watch Davis play. It's clear that he has major issues seeing the field over the OL and DL.

It's like saying having a mediocre or weak arm isn't an issue/detriment. It is. But guys like Peyton Manning, Chad Pennington, Joe Montana, etc. learned how to work around it.

Davis has not learned how to work around his lack of height. And you can see how it affects everything he does. That and his lack of composure. He isn't comfortable staying in the pocket, he struggles finding throwing lanes, he doesn't want to climb the ladder, and he struggles reading the short to intermediate middle of the field. It's an issue...a major issue.

People can throw out a million examples of successful QBs that were 6'2" or shorter, you're not going to change my opinion. Those guys weren't Davis. I've watched enough QBing in my time and know enough about the position to be able to tell when a guy is having issues trying to compensate for his lack of height and field vision.

Height is a non-issue. If you can play, you can play.

It's not an issue for Aaron Donald because he has talent...he can play.
It's not an issue for Drew Brees because....he can play.
Etc, etc, etc

It's an issue for Austin Davis because he can't play.

If there's any pro sport where height should be a major determinant in a player's ability to play the game successfully, it's basketball. At the pro level, nobody should be able to succeed at only 6'2"...never mind 6'0" or less. Yet it happens. It's certainly not often, but it happens. And it's not a compensation factor.....it's a talent factor.

You can repeat your opinion a million times in this thread and that will still make it nothing more than....your opinion. Nobody's asking you to change it.

 

[jrry32]

Height is a non-issue. If you can play, you can play.

It's not an issue for Aaron Donald because he has talent...he can play.
It's not an issue for Drew Brees because....he can play.
Etc, etc, etc

It's an issue for Austin Davis because he can't play.

If there's any pro sport where height should be a major determinant in a player's ability to play the game successfully, it's basketball. At the pro level, nobody should be able to succeed at only 6'2"...never mind 6'0" or less. Yet it happens. It's certainly not often, but it happens. And it's not a compensation factor.....it's a talent factor.

You can repeat your opinion a million times in this thread and that will still make it nothing more than....your opinion. Nobody's asking you to change it.

Height is an issue. Because it affects your ability to play. Like arm strength, it won't keep you from being successful but it can be an obstacle that is difficult to overcome.

Basketball, you say? Yet, there have been successful basketball players at 5'9" and even 5'3"...so I guess that means height is a non-issue in basketball too?

 

[Alan]

VegasRam seeing the same thing as me:
No dog in this fight, BUT (Stu), that fade to Bailey was PERFECT!

Better than Sam can throw it. Wonderful to see.

I think Davis has performed much better than I expected and Hill is exactly what I expected. They both have done enough for us to win some games.