Saturday, September 28, 2013

2013 Week 3 Write-Up


HIGHEST TAVA IN A WIN: Jake Locker, TEN
QB SUPP: 1.95
Result: Won by 3 points
TAVA: 3.15
Locker’s final passing line (23/37, 299 yards, 1 TD) might not look that stellar at first glance, but Locker came through when it counted for his team, leading TD drives of 76 and 94 yards, often helping with his legs (66 yards rushing). He also led two decently long FG drives, which would have been 3 if not for Rob Bironas missed field goal from 43 yards out. Locker’s performance doesn’t stand up to some of the great wins from earlier this season, but it’s the highest TAVA score of a quiet week 3, and a very solid effort.

 
HIGHEST TAVA IN A LOSS: Terrelle Pryor, OAK
QB SUPP: -0.90
Result: Lost by 16 points
TAVA: 0.96
Pryor didn’t finish the game, but with Matt Flynn throwing only 2 passes, it didn’t seem necessary to score this contest as a combined QB effort for the Raiders. Pryor was basically the entire Raiders offense against the Broncos. He averaged 10 yards per pass (helped by a 73 yard touchdown to Denarius Moore) and rushed for 36 yards. While he provided over 300 total yards, his teammates added only 13 rushing yards (and McFadden added 16 more yards of offense on a trick play). Meanwhile, the defense allowed 37 points. Losing by 16 is never good, but the Raiders team was completely overwhelmed. Pryor was the only bright spot for Oakland, and certainly not to blame for the loss.

 
HIGHEST QB SUPPORT: Cam Newton, CAR
QB SUPP: 7.44
Result: Won by 38 points
TAVA: 1.37
The defense allowed 0 points despite Newton throwing an interception that gave the Giants possession at the Panthers 17 yard line. Newton’s teammates rushed for 149 yards, the offense enjoyed some good field position, and Gano kicked a 53 yarder. The Panthers didn’t need much from the QB position to win this game. Newton, aside from the one interception, actually did play very well, helping his team turn the game into a total blow-out, which is why he still ends up with a relatively high TAVA score for the week.

 
LOWEST QB SUPPORT: Eli Manning, NYG
QB SUPP: -0.49
Result: Lost by 38 points
TAVA: -1.47
After Pryor (discussed above), Eli Manning had the lowest QB Support in week 3. His team allowed 38 points and rushed for only 46 yards. He had one drive with good field position, but that yielded no points partially because of missed field goal from 38 yards out. Manning’s performance was also pretty poor and this is reflected in his TAVA score. A win might never have been in the cards for the Giants, but maybe it could have been better than a 38 point defeat.

 
LOWEST TAVA IN A WIN: Geno Smith, NYJ
QB SUPP: 5.60
Result: 7 point win
TAVA: -0.58
I’m not buying Geno Smith yet, and I’m not impressed because the Jets are 2-1 with him at QB. His TAVA score for the year is at -1.57, ranking 31 out of 33 QBs, ahead of only Josh Freeman and Blaine Gabbert. In week 3, the Jets allowed 20 points, but that was in large part due to two Smith turnovers that gave the Bills the ball inside the Jets 30 and inside the Jets 20. Meanwhile, the offense scored 27 points, but that was with 168 rushing yards from Smith’s teammates. Smith ended the day with a seemingly impressive box score line (16/29. 331 yards, 2 TDs) and some great individual plays, but he needs to cut down on his costly mistakes and add a little more consistency if he wants to help the Jets continue their winning ways.

 
LOWEST TAVA IN A LOSS: Michael Vick, PHI
QB SUPP: 4.06
Result: Lost by ten points
TAVA: -3.36
Speaking of a lack of consistency, Michael Vick has been hot and cold all year… and it’s only three weeks into the season. Well, week 3 was a “cold” time for Vick. His 3 turnovers, including yet another one returned for a TD sank the Eagles chances of winning their Thursday night match-up against the Chiefs. Vick made some nice plays, amassed 300 total yards, but that did little to make-up for his costly errors. This was a winnable game for the Eagles, and as brilliant as Vick can be, it doesn’t help if he undoes it all with pick sixes and the like.

No comments:

Post a Comment