Originally posted by Furlow:
Originally posted by 5_Golden_Rings:
Let me just say this to both sides of this argument:
(1) The Texans defense when we played them last was better than their raw stats indicate. Bad offense makes your defense worse, and they were the 32nd best offense.
(2) The Cowboys defense last year was also better than their statistics indicate. Their pass rush in particular. That was a great defense .Absolutely on par with our defense. The fact that Brock didn't cost us is remarkable. He remained quite poised in the face of maybe the second best pass rush (we had the best pass rusher, but the Eagles and Cowboys had better team pass rush, IMHO; they were tied with the Eagles at 52% pass rush win rate. We were only 46%).
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34536376/2022-nfl-pass-rushing-run-stopping-blocking-leaderboard-win-rate-rankings-top-players-teams
One of Brock's "near interception" I keep seeing posted here was a tipped pass. The kid played very well. He missed a few things, sure. Was late a couple times, yeah. But he avoided the game-losing mistake. We lost by two scores if Jimmy is our QB in that game.
.
.
So, both sides of this Trey v. Brock argument are underestimating how good the other side's QB is. Trey is not trash, and Brock is not just a lucky one hit wonder.
Great post. I don't even understand why there is a "Trey vs. Brock" argument. It's silly. Clearly right now Brock is better and is the starter. If Trey gets his chance, we root for him too. It's not that hard.
That Texans defense was horrible. What some don't recognize is that was one of the best defensive performances (points wise) for the Texans that year, which is sad.
ultimately, we won and Trey got it together in the second half, which was great. It was his best performance, But as a whole, he still displayed the concerns he's always had IMO. He had passes nearly int, or should have been picked, just like some like to point out with Purdy. He struggled for the most part against a bad defense to keep the offense converting downs and scoring points most of the game. Just watch the film.
it was his second start so it isn't a big deal. I just don't think it was a good game. To me, it didn't inspire confidence that he is going to be some stud. It felt like I was watching a backup qb on a stacked team.
To me, a huge difference in their play is the way they control and take ownership of the offense when they play. With Brock, he goes out there and makes his presence known. He's very in control and confident.. like he's the owner of the team. With Lance it feels like I'm just watching someone try and run a play. Which most likely has to due with his lack of playing over the course of his life.
it's a super small sample size, so I don't look at it as he will never be good. I just don't think there is a logical reason to play Lance right now unless you cherish picks. If we didn't spend these picks on him, not many would be clamoring for him to play. I think Brock's worst game was way better than lances best game.
Trey just needs to keep doing what he is doing, grinding and working, so when he gets his chance - he can prove himself and his worth.
outside of that, I don't understand comparing the two because lances three starts don't even come close to Brock's worst three starts. They're both small sample sizes but it isn't even close. If Lance was a second round pick or later, or Brock was a higher round pick, no one would even bring up starting Lance. The clamor for Lance is driven by his draft status and not actual data or film.