Atomic Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Statistical look at the individual drives as led by the 3 backup QBs (Numbers don't include Portis' last "drive", which was essentially killing the clock): Starting point -- Result -- Total drive length Brian Brohm W24 -- Punt from W48 -- 24 ydsT32 -- 20 yd FG -- 19 ydsW43 -- 44 yd FG -- 30 yds55 -- 43 yd Missed FG -- 20 yds Average drive - 23.25 yards Average starting point - Winnipeg 50 Robert Marve W46 -- Punt from W46 -- 0 ydsT47 -- TD -- 47 ydsT37 -- 35 yd Missed FG -- 9 ydsW24 -- Punt from W28 -- 4 ydsW35 -- Punt from W31 -- 4 yds T53 -- TD -- 53 yds Average drive - 19.5 yards Average starting point - Winnipeg 49 Josh Portis W21 -- Punt from W21 -- 0 ydsW42 -- TD -- 68 ydsW26 -- Punt from W30 -- 4 ydsW15 -- Punt from W21 -- 6 yds Average drive - 19.5 yards Average starting point - Winnipeg 26 Doublezero, sweep the leg, Judd and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Dee Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Thanks for doing that legwork. It shows pretty clearly, that things are still very muddled up, behind Drew Willy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlue Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Numbers skewed for Portis somewhat based on the one scoring drive. Based on these figures Brohm shows to be the most consistent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweep the leg Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 I like that Brohm had at least one 1st down on each drive. shadybob 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadybob Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 I haven't been a big Brohm fan, but he has been the most consistent thus far. Marve brings a spark, but his injury history and how heavily he depends on his legs make me nervous. Portis didn't look particularly good against Toronto, he will have to put on a show in the final preseason game but even then I'm not sure how he fits into the mix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yourface Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Ehh... I'm not a fan of your evaluation because the QBs don't play much of a part in the effectiveness of the running back. I prefer to look at plays in which the QBs are involved (meaning yards-per-attempt amalgamated with yards-per-carry): Marve: 6.92 Brohm: 5.18 Portis: 5.3 Also, you can't ignore Marve's effectiveness in the red zone. blitzmore and Judd 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goalie Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Marve has a place as the 3rd string red zone QB it seems. But brohm and even willy consistently move the sticks. Marve is go big or go home but good in red zone. That seems to be the ideal 3rd stringer right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yourface Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 I haven't been a big Brohm fan, but he has been the most consistent thus far. Marve brings a spark, but his injury history and how heavily he depends on his legs make me nervous. Portis didn't look particularly good against Toronto, he will have to put on a show in the final preseason game but even then I'm not sure how he fits into the mix. I don't know about that. Brohm was awful in his first preseason game last year, okay in his second one, bad against Edmonton, pretty good against Calgary, average at best in his last game against Toronto. He has always been very inconsistent in practice as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atomic Posted June 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Ehh... I'm not a fan of your evaluation because the QBs don't play much of a part in the effectiveness of the running back. I prefer to look at plays in which the QBs are involved (meaning yards-per-attempt amalgamated with yards-per-carry): Marve: 6.92 Brohm: 5.18 Portis: 5.3 Also, you can't ignore Marve's effectiveness in the red zone. First off, this is not an evaluation, merely a statistical breakdown of the offensive drives. I would advise against putting too much faith in any of these numbers. There are a lot of factors to consider, such as supporting cast, opposing defence, and playcalling. I definitely wouldn't evaluate the effectiveness of a QB based on my numbers or yours. I just thought it would be interesting to look at. TBURGESS 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yourface Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Marve has a place as the 3rd string red zone QB it seems. But brohm and even willy consistently move the sticks. Marve is go big or go home but good in red zone. That seems to be the ideal 3rd stringer right now. That's not true. Brohm has not been good at moving the sticks. He had one decent game last year in which he was no better than Marve at moving the sticks, but otherwise he's shown nothing. Judd 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goalie Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 I think it's like this... Willy and Brohm can run the O how MB has designed it. His O don't really require the QB to run the ball it seems. That's what the RB is for. I think Marve is more of the run first type of QB. He's not a pocket passer like the others. I think if willy got hurt Brohm is the guy that can run the same o. Marve I think is a guy you design a more run based O with. I think a nice option QB really. He's the change of pace guy really and that's great. Hope he sticks and they use him in the redzone more. Maybe even 10 and in instead as really. He can run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blitzmore Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 This really means next to nothing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atomic Posted June 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 This really means next to nothing! Thanks, good contribution, the site would die without you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goalie Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Marve has a place as the 3rd string red zone QB it seems. But brohm and even willy consistently move the sticks. Marve is go big or go home but good in red zone. That seems to be the ideal 3rd stringer right now.That's not true. Brohm has not been good at moving the sticks. He had one decent game last year in which he was no better than Marve at moving the sticks, but otherwise he's shown nothing.Marve has shown he can run but perhaps isn't that pocket passer that MB and really the league as a whole seem to like. Hey that's great tho. He's a good option QB change of pace guy. Wonder what happens to Marve when someone actually lays him out after a big run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blitzmore Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 I think it's like this... Willy and Brohm can run the O how MB has designed it. His O don't really require the QB to run the ball it seems. That's what the RB is for. I think Marve is more of the run first type of QB. He's not a pocket passer like the others. I think if willy got hurt Brohm is the guy that can run the same o. Marve I think is a guy you design a more run based O with. I think a nice option QB really. He's the change of pace guy really and that's great. Hope he sticks and they use him in the redzone more. Maybe even 10 and in instead as really. He can run. Actually...MB called the for Marve to run on the play he scored the touchdown. You really have no idea how many more times the play calls for a run, and not necessarily up the middle as a QB sneak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goalie Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 I think it's like this... Willy and Brohm can run the O how MB has designed it. His O don't really require the QB to run the ball it seems. That's what the RB is for. I think Marve is more of the run first type of QB. He's not a pocket passer like the others. I think if willy got hurt Brohm is the guy that can run the same o. Marve I think is a guy you design a more run based O with. I think a nice option QB really. He's the change of pace guy really and that's great. Hope he sticks and they use him in the redzone more. Maybe even 10 and in instead as really. He can run.Actually...MB called the for Marve to run on the play he scored the touchdown. You really have no idea how many more times the play calls for a run, and not necessarily up the middle as a QB sneak. Marve can say what he wants but not sure that's the case. Willy and Brohm can't run. MB probably calls very little QB run plays in general. It's nice if they did with Marve cuz really. That's his skill set Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goalie Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Marve needs to learn to pass because cfl isn't a QB runs the ball every 2 plays league but he's a good change of pace guy with perhaps a redzone skill set that might look good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yourface Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Marve has earned the chance to be the backup. If he falters in that role, so be it. Let Brohm take over. But at this point, Marve has been the much more effective QB. Btw, I love how every thread on this board is turning into a Marve discussion thread. For a supposed third-stringer, he sure is getting a lot of attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBlink Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 The tough thing is that it's hard to earn it as the 3rd string. You're essentially showcasing your skills in practice and waiting for an injury and maybe the guy in front of you playing ineffectively. Im not sure Marve is quite there yet (and the team agrees) but I have high hopes for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbrg Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 This really means next to nothing! Thanks, good contribution, the site would die without you. It's the what, but it's missing the why. We can probably point the finger at TSN for that. But it is a nice change of pace from repeatedly reading 6.9 yards per play. Oh looky, he wrote it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yourface Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Ehh... I'm not a fan of your evaluation because the QBs don't play much of a part in the effectiveness of the running back. I prefer to look at plays in which the QBs are involved (meaning yards-per-attempt amalgamated with yards-per-carry): Marve: 6.92 Brohm: 5.18 Portis: 5.3 Also, you can't ignore Marve's effectiveness in the red zone. First off, this is not an evaluation, merely a statistical breakdown of the offensive drives. I would advise against putting too much faith in any of these numbers. There are a lot of factors to consider, such as supporting cast, opposing defence, and playcalling. I definitely wouldn't evaluate the effectiveness of a QB based on my numbers or yours. I just thought it would be interesting to look at. Misleading numbers are misleading, that's all I'm saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Ehh... I'm not a fan of your evaluation because the QBs don't play much of a part in the effectiveness of the running back. I prefer to look at plays in which the QBs are involved (meaning yards-per-attempt amalgamated with yards-per-carry): Marve: 6.92 Brohm: 5.18 Portis: 5.3 Also, you can't ignore Marve's effectiveness in the red zone. Imagine that, you're not a fan of an evaluation that basically tears apart your entire bias towards Marve. And this number you came up with? What is the point of that? It honestly means nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yourface Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Ehh... I'm not a fan of your evaluation because the QBs don't play much of a part in the effectiveness of the running back. I prefer to look at plays in which the QBs are involved (meaning yards-per-attempt amalgamated with yards-per-carry): Marve: 6.92 Brohm: 5.18 Portis: 5.3 Also, you can't ignore Marve's effectiveness in the red zone. Imagine that, you're not a fan of an evaluation that basically tears apart your entire bias towards Marve. And this number you came up with? What is the point of that? It honestly means nothing. It means that Marve is effective at moving the offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blitzmore Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 This really means next to nothing! Thanks, good contribution, the site would die without you. you're welcome...and it only lives because of you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atomic Posted June 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 Ehh... I'm not a fan of your evaluation because the QBs don't play much of a part in the effectiveness of the running back. I prefer to look at plays in which the QBs are involved (meaning yards-per-attempt amalgamated with yards-per-carry): Marve: 6.92 Brohm: 5.18 Portis: 5.3 Also, you can't ignore Marve's effectiveness in the red zone. First off, this is not an evaluation, merely a statistical breakdown of the offensive drives. I would advise against putting too much faith in any of these numbers. There are a lot of factors to consider, such as supporting cast, opposing defence, and playcalling. I definitely wouldn't evaluate the effectiveness of a QB based on my numbers or yours. I just thought it would be interesting to look at. Misleading numbers are misleading, that's all I'm saying. I hope you realize that yours are just as misleading, that's all I'm saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now