Jump to content

Very good Mariota Article


scine09

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

As far as the tanking is concerned, after Mettenberger went down who do you think Whisenhunt honestly thought gave them the best chance to win, Whitehurst or Locker? And who did he put in to start the Jets game?

It's pretty obvious to me that the Titans wanted desperately to lose out after Mettenberger got hurt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as the tanking is concerned, after Mettenberger went down who do you think Whisenhunt honestly thought gave them the best chance to win, Whitehurst or Locker? And who did he put in to start the Jets game?

It's pretty obvious to me that the Titans wanted desperately to lose out after Mettenberger got hurt.

​Errr ... they lost before Mettenberger was hurt. If you want to touch on the moment when "tanking" began is when they opted for Mett to "see what he has."

That's not to say that Mett was a bad QB ... it's just that they likely called plays and called a game to "see what he has." Instead of going ultra conservative.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What would they have done if Tampa decided to draft Mariota?

​Well it was Mariota and Williams that got the steak and oysters, so I think that would have made a trade down or Williams very likely. 

I know Whiz stated they liked both QBs, but I don't see him shitting on him publicly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

​Errr ... they lost before Mettenberger was hurt. If you want to touch on the moment when "tanking" began is when they opted for Mett to "see what he has."

That's not to say that Mett was a bad QB ... it's just that they likely called plays and called a game to "see what he has." Instead of going ultra conservative.

​Whiz wanted to see the Mett win games and I think they tried their best to accomplish that so I don't consider it "tanking". It was also pretty clear that Jake was done and Charlie was never seen as any sort of potential answer. I think the injuries just piled up to a ridiculous level and we reached a point where we weren't necessarily trying to lose but realized we didn't have enough talent to win. I think if they were truly tanking we don't try to actually beat the Jets or Jags late in the year. I remember being nervous as hell that we would fuck it up and beat the Jets.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What's the lesson in all this? HEY ... maybe when coaches and GMs make fairly definitive and glowing statements ... we should believe them.

​When it comes to these two I'll never question it again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Titans are not likely to call for as many designed runs as the Seahawks do, though. Most of Mariota's running likely will result from necessity.

"If you think a quarterback is going to run a lot, that hasn't traditionally worked out," said Whisenhunt, who never has been a zone-read guy. "Those guys take shots. It's a tough, physical league. So I think you have to temper those things to a degree. But if a play breaks down and he can run for a first down, make a big play, that's an important piece."

​I hope this is true, but I assumed coming from the spread they would try and go with a simpler offense that included designed runs. This will likely lead to more growing pains though.

 

I'd prefer Mariota to be strictly a pocket passer

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Titans didn't tank, that's ridiculous.

 

TB tanked in the 2nd half of the finale and it was obvious

​Yeah. Tampa Bay has since pretty much admitted to it. I also think Whiz and Web's jobs were in a precarious enough position that intentionally losing games wouldn't really have been a good idea at the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Titans didn't tank, that's ridiculous.

 

TB tanked in the 2nd half of the finale and it was obvious

​Who do you think Whisenhunt thought gave the Titans a better chance to win going into the Jets game? Locker or Whitehurst?

Link to post
Share on other sites

​Whiz wanted to see the Mett win games and I think they tried their best to accomplish that so I don't consider it "tanking". It was also pretty clear that Jake was done and Charlie was never seen as any sort of potential answer. I think the injuries just piled up to a ridiculous level and we reached a point where we weren't necessarily trying to lose but realized we didn't have enough talent to win. I think if they were truly tanking we don't try to actually beat the Jets or Jags late in the year. I remember being nervous as hell that we would fuck it up and beat the Jets.

​Players don't "tank." They were trying to win both of those games. Just like the Bucs players were trying to win the Saints game. Many of them wouldn't even be around for 2015 they couldn't have cared less about what happened in the draft.  They were playing for their careers.

The tanking happens when the coaches don't put the best players on the field.

Link to post
Share on other sites

​Who do you think Whisenhunt thought gave the Titans a better chance to win going into the Jets game? Locker or Whitehurst?

​Honestly? Whitehurst. I think Whiz thinks Jake straight up sucks and I'm sure that the whole benching scenario didn't exactly do wonders for that relationship. There is also the fact that Jake got himself hurt again against the Jets and Charlie had to take over, again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...