QB_Eagles wrote:Cactus Jack wrote:therealbig3 wrote:Darnold looked bad last year in the playoffs, but it was one game. Not enough sample size to be labeled a playoff choker imo. I think letting him run it back would have been the better option. Especially with how good he looks in Seattle.
Darnold is very good when he has a clean pocket. It's why he's one of the best QB's when using play action. If you have him drop back 40x a game, he won't nearly be as successful. But that's true for most QB's. Seattle is just utilizing his strengths. They run the ball more than most & utilize play action off of it. They run a lot of 2 & 3 TE sets (Max protection). That's why Darnold is having success.
The Vikings lost that playoff game to the Rams because they did a poor job of game planning to protect Darnold & we're simply overwhelmed.
Yeah, but what happened against the Lions then? Their DL wasn't that good (due to injuries) and he only got sacked twice. If the Vikings had won that game, they wouldn't even have faced the Rams.
I really hope for you you don't have to experience more postseason heartbreak, but if you're that optimistic about Darnold suddenly being clutch without all evidence to the contrary maybe it can't be avoided.
That Darnold is playing very well in Seattle isn't the surprise. He played very well for the Vikings, too -- until week 18.
I’m not sure two games is good enough to say there is strong evidence to say he is a choker.
There was a lot more evidence that he wasn’t good at all earlier in his career and he overcame that.
Christ, even I couldn't defend Darnold if he was the QB of my team. Yikes.
