Garrett Wilson talks about the differences between Joe Flacco and Zach Wilson:

[92ShaunEllis92]

26 minutes ago, Spoot-Face said:

 Of course a 37 year old QB is going to have more experience than a 2nd year guy.

Unless the 2nd year guy has just as much/more experience at banging older 37-40 year olds. Then they’d be about even, no?

[#27TheDominator]

7 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Sure, but not to be repetitive - they're going to have to give a timeline - so by the time they know how the team is doing with Flacco they would have already committed to when ZW will be back.

I guess they can always claim he's had a set back or something like that - but I just don't see it working that way.

Or say Yes, Zach is ready but we're sticking with Joe because we're winning - but I just don't see that either.

Honestly, I do get what you're saying and not even saying it's the wrong choice - just that I don't see it happening that way.  I think on Wed or Thur we'll get a timeline - and they'll get Wilson back as soon as he's ready.

Didn't we literally live through the exact same thing with Fitzpatrick and Geno?   It was Geno's team.  Until it wasn't. 

[FidelioJet]

8 minutes ago, Warfish said:

Garrett is crediting his veteran QB with throwing catchable balls, oh no, what a sin.

Stop hating on our players just because they won't blow Zach in every soundbite ffs. 

Nah, it's a stupid thing to say and I'm sure he knows it right now.  Rookie mistake is all.

You can be as self righteous as you want - but it was a mistake to say.  He'll be asked about this now over and over - and he'll have to make some type of retract.  Like it or not, it will be a distraction.  

I'm not saying it's inaccurate or an attack on Wilson (I don't think Zach or Joe will give it another thought) - just a statement that carries little upside but creates a distraction for the team.

[oatmeal]

I’m not crowing NOBODY apart of this sorry organization until we see some tangible results on Sundays 

G Wilson hit the juggs machine and STFU ?

[slats]

33 minutes ago, PS17 said:

Elijah was the WR4 (4th most productive) in fantasy when Zach Wilson was out last year. 

Moore missed the last five games of the year when Zach was looking a lot better than he did before he got hurt. In the two games that they played together in before Elijah got hurt he caught 10 passes for 123 yards and a TD. Right on track with what he did with the other QBs while Zach was out. 
 
Granted, the catch:target ratio could’ve been better. 

[kdels62]

33 minutes ago, Bronx said:

Those stats are ignored by the obsessive fans.

Moore’s 3rd highest yard total in a game was with Zach at QB. It was also the most targets he got in a game. Most of the games where Zach and Moore played together were rookie QB and rookie WR’s first games in the NFL. Maybe nothing conclusive can be taken from your stats.

[Larz]

It’s not a coincidence that LaFluers offense looks better when anyone besides Wilson runs it

[shevys]

22 minutes ago, 92ShaunEllis92 said:

That commentary by G. Wilson only validates the concern that some have voiced here regarding Zachary:

He needs to sit and learn so as to see how to properly operate the offense and NOT feel that he has to be Superman at QB, while a veteran QB can help develop the young playmakers : G Wilson, E. Moore, Conky, Berrios, B Hall, M Carter, Ruckert, etc. - who don’t have to adjust to a neophyte forcing things and stunting the growth and cohesion of the offense. 
 

Or, conversely, they all play and grow together. That's my preference. 

[Bronx]

18 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Nah, it's a stupid thing to say and I'm sure he knows it right now.  Rookie mistake is all.

He must have 37 inner voices telling him to say so or maybe @Integrity28coached him...good job buddy!

[More Cowbell]

58 minutes ago, ZachEY said:

Zach Wilson's touch has been fine.  Accuracy and decision making and ability to see the field, not so much.  But, he's not been firing lasers at WRs all over the field.

Last season before he was injured it was an issue, after he came back it looked like he worked on his touch a bit. Haven't  seen enough this season of course to know if he corrected it but Wilson pointing it out is an indication he hasn't  worked that out yet. 

[Bronx]

Just now, More Cowbell said:

Last season before he was injured it was an issue, after he came back it looked like he worked on his touch a bit. Haven't  seen enough this season of course to know if he corrected it but Wilson pointing it out is an indication he hasn't  worked that out yet. 

Garrett should have kept his opinion to himself, but he was simply echoing locker room conversations.  

[PS17]

20 minutes ago, slats said:

Moore missed the last five games of the year when Zach was looking a lot better than he did before he got hurt. In the two games that they played together in before Elijah got hurt he caught 10 passes for 123 yards and a TD. Right on track with what he did with the other QBs while Zach was out. 
 
Granted, the catch:target ratio could’ve been better. 

True. But Moore’s two huge games were with White/Johnson and Flacco. Wouldn’t surprise me if the young WRs prefer Flacco to get their own stock rising. 

[Augustiniak]

1 minute ago, Bronx said:

Garrett should have kept his opinion to himself, but he was simply echoing locker room conversations.  

You can tell the guy is a leader already.  He’s not afraid to speak his mind, but does so in an intelligent way.  It’s guys like him who are going to tell wilson what he needs to work on

[Warfish]

56 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Nah, it's a stupid thing to say and I'm sure he knows it right now.  Rookie mistake is all.

You can be as self righteous as you want - but it was a mistake to say.  He'll be asked about this now over and over - and he'll have to make some type of retract.  Like it or not, it will be a distraction.  

I'm not saying it's inaccurate or an attack on Wilson (I don't think Zach or Joe will give it another thought) - just a statement that carries little upside but creates a distraction for the team.

No mistake at all.  It's an absolutely solid milk toast comment.  There is no news or revelation here.

Supporting his current QB, exactly what you'd want from a rookie.  Better yet, it's obviously factually accurate.

So there is no distraction in this unless hypersensitive fans want to make one out of it. 

Zach throws a less catchable ball, likely a factor in the high number of drops last year, and needs to do better (as he does in mnay aspects of his game).  That's obvious to anyone with eyes, touch passing and varying velocity to suit the situation is clearly not yet his strength.  As it often isn;t for young QB's.  

Flacco, the ancient Vet, likely figured that out a long time ago, and has vastly better touch on his passes than young Zach.  Zach should take advantage of that (mentoring Zach is why he's here, isn't it) and work on that weak aspect of his developing game.

[August]

Zach Wilson isn’t good 

[Joe Willie White Shoes]

1 hour ago, #27TheDominator said:

Didn't we literally live through the exact same thing with Fitzpatrick and Geno?   It was Geno's team.  Until it wasn't. 

And how did that work out in the long run?  Fitztragic crapped the bed in a big game and then completely reverted to form in 2016, wrecking the entire season.  Bowles eventually got fired, as did the next coach, and the GM,  and the team is still looking for a QB.  If this ends up being Flacco's team, everybody is toast from JD on down to us - the fans - who will get another 3-4 of bad football.  

[Bronx]

5 minutes ago, August said:

Zach Wilson isn’t good 

Is August your last name by any chance? I knew someone in Fort Lee with the last name August. 

[August]

19 minutes ago, Bronx said:

Is August your last name by any chance? I knew someone in Fort Lee with the last name August. 

Nah it’s my birth month 

[Supersonic]

2 hours ago, ZachEY said:

Zach Wilson's touch has been fine.  Accuracy and decision making and ability to see the field, not so much.  But, he's not been firing lasers at WRs all over the field.

Really?  Didn't a WR just tell you that he is?  Your expert opinion is suspect at best ?

[FidelioJet]

Just now, Supersonic said:

Really?  Didn't a WR just tell you that he is?  Your expert opinion is suspect at best ?

Well no.  That's not what he said.  He didn't say Wilson's touch was fine.

He said Flacco's was very good.  He didn't, even a little bit, complain about Zach's ball.  

It surely sounds like he prefers Flacco's ball - but doesn't mean he's not happy with Zach's.

[Augustiniak]

16 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Well no.  That's not what he said.  He didn't say Wilson's touch was fine.

He said Flacco's was very good.  He didn't, even a little bit, complain about Zach's ball.  

It surely sounds like he prefers Flacco's ball - but doesn't mean he's not happy with Zach's.

Flacco throws a more catchable ball and understands when to put zip on it and when not to.  We saw this last year with Zach when he was throwing screens too hard.  He’s got to chill out.

[T0mShane]

So, PFF charts accuracy “in frame,” which differentiates between the ol’ “if he gets a hand on it, it’s catchable” maxim and the more specific “hit him in the breadbasket” ideal. Basically, it’s a charting of perfectly placed passes. Below is the graph showing where Zach hits and misses, and by what percentage. To cut to the chase, here is the “in frame” accuracy of Zach Wilson vs some of his contemporaries:

League average: ~58%

Tom Brady: 63%

Mac Jones: 60.1%

Trevor Lawrence: 54.1%

Justin Fields: 50%

Zach Wilson: 44%

It’s not a coincidence that every receiver (except Jamison Crowder) saw their catch rate plummet while playing with Zach. 

Anyway, here’s the chart (red spots are “bad”)

 

[Saul Goodman]

18 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

So, PFF charts accuracy “in frame,” which differentiates between the ol’ “if he gets a hand on it, it’s catchable” maxim and the more specific “hit him in the breadbasket” ideal. Basically, it’s a charting of perfectly placed passes. Below is the graph showing where Zach hits and misses, and by what percentage. To cut to the chase, here is the “in frame” accuracy of Zach Wilson vs some of his contemporaries:

League average: ~58%

Tom Brady: 63%

Mac Jones: 60.1%

Trevor Lawrence: 54.1%

Justin Fields: 50%

Zach Wilson: 44%

It’s not a coincidence that every receiver (except Jamison Crowder) saw their catch rate plummet while playing with Zach. 

Anyway, here’s the chart (red spots are “bad”)

 

Confirms what we saw last year - even Zach’s completions were off target. It was pretty rare to see a pass arrive in front of a receiver’s chest. His accuracy is an issue well beyond the worm-killing bounced passes.

Adding a pass-catching RB in Breece Hall and some big tight ends should help boost his completion percentage but I’m skeptical that he has the accuracy to become a top-15 QB. 

[jgb]

OMG Garrett Wilson is a troll.

[jgb]

28 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

So, PFF charts accuracy “in frame,” which differentiates between the ol’ “if he gets a hand on it, it’s catchable” maxim and the more specific “hit him in the breadbasket” ideal. Basically, it’s a charting of perfectly placed passes. Below is the graph showing where Zach hits and misses, and by what percentage. To cut to the chase, here is the “in frame” accuracy of Zach Wilson vs some of his contemporaries:

League average: ~58%

Tom Brady: 63%

Mac Jones: 60.1%

Trevor Lawrence: 54.1%

Justin Fields: 50%

Zach Wilson: 44%

It’s not a coincidence that every receiver (except Jamison Crowder) saw their catch rate plummet while playing with Zach. 

Anyway, here’s the chart (red spots are “bad”)

 

Data is an illusion. You see what you want to see.

[jgb]

58 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Well no.  That's not what he said.  He didn't say Wilson's touch was fine.

He said Flacco's was very good.  He didn't, even a little bit, complain about Zach's ball.  

It surely sounds like he prefers Flacco's ball - but doesn't mean he's not happy with Zach's.

Sometimes what is not said is more important than what is.

[Jolot]

2 hours ago, Warfish said:

Garrett is crediting his veteran QB with throwing catchable balls, oh no, what a sin.

Stop hating on our players just because they won't blow Zach in every soundbite ffs. 

Yup , 100% . Players aren’t fans , they don’t care about the 5-10 year plan , half these guys are all one play away from being out of the league .

[jgb]

14 minutes ago, Saul Goodman said:

Confirms what we saw last year - even Zach’s completions were off target. It was pretty rare to see a pass arrive in front of a receiver’s chest. His accuracy is an issue well beyond the worm-killing bounced passes.

Adding a pass-catching RB in Breece Hall and some big tight ends should help boost his completion percentage but I’m skeptical that he has the accuracy to become a top-15 QB. 

Our QB is the YAC-killer.

[Fantasy Island]

3 hours ago, DJF71 said:

The players still hate Zach.

They did win after he left

[FidelioJet]

37 minutes ago, T0mShane said:

So, PFF charts accuracy “in frame,” which differentiates between the ol’ “if he gets a hand on it, it’s catchable” maxim and the more specific “hit him in the breadbasket” ideal. Basically, it’s a charting of perfectly placed passes. Below is the graph showing where Zach hits and misses, and by what percentage. To cut to the chase, here is the “in frame” accuracy of Zach Wilson vs some of his contemporaries:

League average: ~58%

Tom Brady: 63%

Mac Jones: 60.1%

Trevor Lawrence: 54.1%

Justin Fields: 50%

Zach Wilson: 44%

It’s not a coincidence that every receiver (except Jamison Crowder) saw their catch rate plummet while playing with Zach. 

Anyway, here’s the chart (red spots are “bad”)

 

Who here is saying Zach was accurate last year?  It's like since no one is arguing with you anymore you'll just post things no one cares about to start arguments.

We get it, you don't like Zach Wilson, we also get he was bad last year. 

But it really doesn't matter - because last year is over. 

 

[OtherwiseHappyinLife]

Man, let’s get a grip.  This is what I’ve ‘learned’ this week

1. Teammates hate Zach

2. If he just relaxed, he would not have thrown the interception

3. If he didn’t play hero ball, he likely wouldn’t have hurt himself

4. Zach Wilson isn’t good, implying he never will be after 1 season

5. Mike White sucks, even though it should not be surprising he was completely rusty given his TC reps

My lord, talk about headline reactions.

How about.

1. A rookie was complimenting a vet (shocker).  Could he have added a caveat, sure?  But again, he’s a rookie.

2. He didn’t throw an interception in his last 5 games last year.  This was the same interception he threw at the scrimmage, which points out he needs to look off his intended target when he is 5 feet in front of him.  A bad habit that needs to be corrected

3. Hero ball?  The guy was trying to keep the drive alive and get the first team more reps after the first drive int.  He’s a competitor.  

4. He’s entering his second season..

5. A favorite narrative of some.  How about he’s a good QB to have on the roster and is the only backup I can remember winning a game in recent years, against a good team.  The Jets presumed starter hasn’t lasted a full season in half a decade and we want to punt away a guy who actually won a game and looked good doing so

 

[jgb]

3 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Who here is saying Zach was accurate last year?  It's like since no one is arguing with you anymore you'll just post things no one cares about to start arguments.

We get it, you don't like Zach Wilson, we also get he was bad last year. 

But it really doesn't matter - because last year is over. 

 

Counterpoint — “last year” is instructive of “this year.”

[Ron Rico]

Zach needs to take Psilocybin like Aaron Rogers. Trails and sh*t. 

[FidelioJet]

7 minutes ago, jgb said:

Counterpoint — “last year” is instructive of “this year.”

Second half of last year is instructive of the 1st too.

But I hear that doesn't matter.  I would be interested in seeing that chart the final 5 games.   I would be willing to wager it is quite a bit better.

Moreover there is clear signs of growth in practice from year 1 to. year 2.

We can choose to ONLY focus on the negative or look for positives signs and progress while also accepting the negative.  Some people like our friend @TomShane choose the former.  

I prefer to the latter.

[jgb]

5 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Second half of last year is instructive of the 1st too.

But I hear that doesn't matter.  I would be interested in seeing that chart the final 5 games.   I would be willing to wager it is quite a bit better.

Moreover there is clear signs of growth in practice from year 1 to. year 2.

We can choose to ONLY focus on the negative or look for positives signs and progress while also accepting the negative.  Some people like our friend @TomShane choose the former.  

I prefer to the latter.

Second half when he was not quite as bad does count. So he might not be the worst in the NFL. He could also be an outrageous outlier that comes out of nowhere to Josh Allen the league. If you’d like to bet on that result, please let me know. Got three kids to put through college.