Henne can't

[Sherif]

Henne did average tonight. Still locks on his man, can't see alot of those passes working against more elite corners. He was inaccurate on every pass beyond 20 yards.

 

[dolphone]

haha, go ahead and get all excited if you want. I've been watching this stuff too long to let a game like this change my opinion.

Get back to me when Henne strings together several good performances against much better teams than the NFL'S WORST.

No, actually I won't. Your inability to see the point presented to you is telling enough. Good night.

 

[dolphone]

Tell that to Peyton Manning Superbowl before last! One bad read and pass erased everything he did all night!

No, actually it didn't. He still played a pretty awesome game that night, and lost (along with his entire *team*) against another great team in the NFL. It doesn't change or erase anything else he did that night.

And that's the biggets problem with snap judgements. I agree 100% that whatever Henne did tonight does not automatically erase the struggles he's had in the past. I'm 100% for the fact that he needs to show more games like this, consistently, before we can claim his woes are behind him. But to dismiss that he had a good game because of two passes? That's just ridiculous.

 

[tay0365]

It kills a lot of us that Henne had a night that can be misconstrued as being a lot better than it really was, because now we'll have to deal with Henne fans being insufferable.

Oh, and Matt Moore has again thrown nicer passes than Henne has thrown, he's just playing with backups who don't know what they are doing and who are gonna to get cut because they don't catch passes they should.

Oh yea, Moore threw much better passes then Henne tonight.

 

[flynryan15]

Show me such tapes. That's all I'm asking.

How many times do you have to be told which games? You can go back to Henne playing Michigan and find the same exact roll out interception as he threw against the Bucs, Titans, Pats, Jets, and Jags. You want to see a repeat of the interception he threw last week against the Falcons? Fine when he entered the Charges game, also same coverage and route against the Saints, Titans, and Pats.

 

[flynryan15]

No, actually it didn't. He still played a pretty awesome game that night, and lost (along with his entire *team*) against another great team in the NFL. It doesn't change or erase anything else he did that night.

And that's the biggets problem with snap judgements. I agree 100% that whatever Henne did tonight does not automatically erase the struggles he's had in the past. I'm 100% for the fact that he needs to show more games like this, consistently, before we can claim his woes are behind him. But to dismiss that he had a good game because of two passes? That's just ridiculous.

Actually no you are once again 100% wrong you can go watch Peyton Manning fighting back tears in the post game press conference. He flat out says it was his fault he threw a bad pass and never saw the DB jumping the route! See that is a real QB and that is a leader! Peyton knew he was inside the 10 yard line and about to put the game away and he blew it. Notice I said leader because Peyton got up there and owned his mistake! With Henne it is always everyone's fault but his! You never see Manning or Brady saying receivers ran the wrong route. Yet we always hear Henne say that, so maybe it is just Chad! But once again that is probably not good enough for you because in your short history here you continue to prove that A. You know nothing about football and B. No matter what evidence is presented to you nothing sinks in!

 

[flynryan15]

No, actually I won't. Your inability to see the point presented to you is telling enough. Good night.

Whoa! Hello pot calling kettle black! You have been on this site 2 weeks and no matter how many members prove you wrong you just waffle and spin your agenda.

 

[dolphone]

How many times do you have to be told which games? You can go back to Henne playing Michigan and find the same exact roll out interception as he threw against the Bucs, Titans, Pats, Jets, and Jags. You want to see a repeat of the interception he threw last week against the Falcons? Fine when he entered the Charges game, also same coverage and route against the Saints, Titans, and Pats.

Sigh.

First of all, you're pointing at games. Do you mean to tell me EVERY SINGLE PASS in those games was wrong?

Once again: a handful of plays are a start, but they don't define your point. "Henne can't throw against zone coverage". That's a blanket statement, and a very defining at that. If it were true, you would have enormous evidence at your disposal, and could throw it back at me. But throughout two weeks, it's been only 4 games. 4 games! Out of how many that he's played?

And also, once again: there's little chance that you can make the coverage from the TV feed. Just because you see a LB standing up doesn't mean it's a zone. It's hard to tell coverages apart - that's why coaches go over game film over and over again. But you seem to think you can actually deduce the coverage from a crooked, limited angle.

You can argue that "Henne struggles against zone". That's fine and dandy, and I won't argue much about it (inasmuch you accept he struggles against any other coverage just as well, and he can succeed against zone just as well). But that's a very different argument than "Henne can't read zone" or "Henne can only throw against man coverage". Even the "he struggles worst against zone" argument is shaky; you have to prove it.

 

[dolphone]

Whoa! Hello pot calling kettle black! You have been on this site 2 weeks and no matter how many members prove you wrong you just waffle and spin your agenda.

My "agenda" (in whatever warped sense you might have) is exposing frauds. Flinging an argument without proof is fraud, cheap shots that anyone can try and no one can refute (in the mind of those putting these arguments forward) because "LALALALA YOU'RE A HATER/LOVER/WHATEVA!!!ONE!1!".

I have no use to argue with someone who simply doesn't understand the argument being presented. I understand the arguments presented just fine, I simply disagree with them. And to be honest, I take a little glee in exposing such behavior, because I like logic, I like rationality, and I despise anyone that tries to circumvent them in a discussion, since such things are based on these very principles.

 

[flynryan15]

Sigh.

First of all, you're pointing at games. Do you mean to tell me EVERY SINGLE PASS in those games was wrong?

Once again: a handful of plays are a start, but they don't define your point. "Henne can't throw against zone coverage". That's a blanket statement, and a very defining at that. If it were true, you would have enormous evidence at your disposal, and could throw it back at me. But throughout two weeks, it's been only 4 games. 4 games! Out of how many that he's played?

And also, once again: there's little chance that you can make the coverage from the TV feed. Just because you see a LB standing up doesn't mean it's a zone. It's hard to tell coverages apart - that's why coaches go over game film over and over again. But you seem to think you can actually deduce the coverage from a crooked, limited angle.

You can argue that "Henne struggles against zone". That's fine and dandy, and I won't argue much about it (inasmuch you accept he struggles against any other coverage just as well, and he can succeed against zone just as well). But that's a very different argument than "Henne can't read zone" or "Henne can only throw against man coverage". Even the "he struggles worst against zone" argument is shaky; you have to prove it.

First of I told you he was a bad QB and struggles with all coverages because eventually he will force a pass or just throw a wild duck for example in overtime against the Titans. However Hennes worst games are when a defense stays in a zone/umbrella scheme.

The problem with you is you are arguing football like it is a murder trial. You want evidence beyond reasonable doubt, yet you won't take stats. Also you fail to realize for a NFL the difference between a great game and being a zero is often 1 or 2 plays. That is why it is the hardest position in professional sports! Which goes back to the Peyton Manning in the Superbowl analogy. Do you think Peyton cares what he did before that play? Not a chance in hell! Peyton is a perfectionist and that interception will haunt him forever.

 

[dolphone]

Actually no you are once again 100% wrong you can go watch Peyton Manning fighting back tears in the post game press conference. He flat out says it was his fault he threw a bad pass and never saw the DB jumping the route! See that is a real QB and that is a leader! Peyton knew he was inside the 10 yard line and about to put the game away and he blew it. Notice I said leader because Peyton got up there and owned his mistake! With Henne it is always everyone's fault but his! You never see Manning or Brady saying receivers ran the wrong route. Yet we always hear Henne say that, so maybe it is just Chad! But once again that is probably not good enough for you because in your short history here you continue to prove that A. You know nothing about football and B. No matter what evidence is presented to you nothing sinks in!

Once again you're changing the goalposts.

First you argue that Manning's interception invalidates everything he did. I point out it doesn't, and you come back with him being sad about losing. That makes no sense. Him being sad doesn't mean that what he did is invalid. It's quite an acomplishment to get to the Superbowl, let alone be a couple of plays away from winning it. He might be sad he didn't fulfill his ultimate goal, but he had plenty of success along the way. Failing at the end doesn't invalidate any of it.

Mentioning that Manning owned up to his mistakes leaves out glaring holes, like the time when he mentioned some "protection problems". Yet neither account for his abilities as QB. To say that Henne mentioning that a WR ran a route wrong is some sort of indictement of his abilities is as absurd as saying that the POTUS is a lousy president because he's black. It has absolutely no bearing on what his job entails.

But then again... that wasn't the point, was it?

 

[flynryan15]

Once again you're changing the goalposts.

First you argue that Manning's interception invalidates everything he did. I point out it doesn't, and you come back with him being sad about losing. That makes no sense. Him being sad doesn't mean that what he did is invalid. It's quite an acomplishment to get to the Superbowl, let alone be a couple of plays away from winning it. He might be sad he didn't fulfill his ultimate goal, but he had pilenty of success along the way. Failing at the end doesn't invalidate any of it.

Mentioning that Manning owned up to his mistakes leaves out glaring holes, like the time when he mentioned some "protection problems". Yet neither account for his abilities as QB. To say that Henne mentioning that a WR ran a route wrong is some sort of indictement of his abilities is as absurd as saying that the POTUS is a lousy president because he's black. It has absolutely no bearing on what his job entails.

But then again... that wasn't the point, was it?

It is exactly the point! He is the QB the game was on his shoulders he blew it! Bad game end of story.

Here is you in a nut shell. You don't have a stance, you wallow in a grey area, you claim to prove people wrong and expose them. But in reality you continue to show you have no knowledge of the game of football. If a QB throws a pick inside the ten yard line driving to win the Superbowl in closing moments and it is returned for a TD and they lose he had a bad game! Your evidence is the Saints were holding the Lombardi Trophy.

 

[flynryan15]

My "agenda" (in whatever warped sense you might have) is exposing frauds. Flinging an argument without proof is fraud, cheap shots that anyone can try and no one can refute (in the mind of those putting these arguments forward) because "LALALALA YOU'RE A HATER/LOVER/WHATEVA!!!ONE!1!".

I have no use to argue with someone who simply doesn't understand the argument being presented. I understand the arguments presented just fine, I simply disagree with them. And to be honest, I take a little glee in exposing such behavior, because I like logic, I like rationality, and I despise anyone that tries to circumvent them in a discussion, since such things are based on these very principles.

I will give you that. You don't resort to the you just hate to hate argument, but it is clearly obvious no about of evidence is good enough for you.

 

[dolphone]

First of I told you he was a bad QB and struggles with all coverages because eventually he will force a pass or just throw a wild duck for example in overtime against the Titans. However Hennes worst games are when a defense stays in a zone/umbrella scheme.

The problem with you is you are arguing football like it is a murder trial. You want evidence beyond reasonable doubt, yet you won't take stats. Also you fail to realize for a NFL the difference between a great game and being a zero is often 1 or 2 plays. That is why it is the hardest position in professional sports! Which goes back to the Peyton Manning in the Superbowl analogy. Do you think Peyton cares what he did before that play? Not a chance in hell! Peyton is a perfectionist and that interception will haunt him forever.

First of all, you haven't presented stats. You're presenting anectdotal evidence, which is NOT the same thing.

Second, I'd love to see some stats. Hell, I've been clamoring for them the past two weeks. But numbers, as you have wisely mentioned, don't tell the whole story.

Here's an example. Let's assume for the sake of argument that Henne threw 50 incomplete/intercepted passes against zone. That's bad, right? But out of how many passes? How many of his total attempts were against zone? What kind of zone are we talking about? In what situation did he throw these passes: where they on close games, or on blowouts?

I do want evidence beyond reasonable doubt, because if there's room for doubt, you can't really DECLARE something. You can argue about it, but that's where it'll stay - as an argument. You will never DEMONSTRATE something you can't PROVE.

 

[dolphone]

It is exactly the point! He is the QB the game was on his shoulders he blew it! Bad game end of story.

Here is you in a nut shell. You don't have a stance, you wallow in a grey area, you claim to prove people wrong and expose them. But in reality you continue to show you have no knowledge of the game of football. If a QB throws a pick inside the ten yard line driving to win the Superbowl in closing moments and it is returned for a TD and they lose he had a bad game! Your evidence is the Saints were holding the Lombardi Trophy.

So you would argue Marino had a worthless career then?