I'm not saying he has poor vision. I am saying he does not have great field vision. That is two different things. If you get a chance to watch film of Geno's face during play watch his eyes and head. He locks on (as in premeditated, like you say) to a receiver paying no attention to defenders. He also tends to throw to a receiver is instead of the spot where the receiver will be by the time the ball arrives. That is for red zone plays. He doesn't seems to have such a problem with that between the 20s.
All i will say about the redzone performance is that since 2022, he has thrown 55 Tds and 6 Ints in the redzone (inside 20). 4 came this year.
The td total is low, but he has had Grubb and Waldron calling plays and both have been shown to be poor in compressed field situations. That bears true especially with Grubb as there isnt anither starter in the league who's completion percentage drops like Geno's did under Grubb the closer you get to the goal line.
He went from middle of the pack in completion percentage in the redzone (inside 20) in Waldron's first year with him and then dropped to near last the second year when Waldron was fired (his inside the 20 numbers were bad but he was better inside the 10).
Grubb improved his percentage completion inside the 20 but the lack of deception and creativity on offense bit us in TDs. And worse, the closer we got to the goal line, the worse the offense was. Inside the 10, his completion percentage dropped 25 points.
2022 he was at 52.8% inside the 20 (Allen for example was at 53, Stafford at 48%.) And 50% inside the 10.
He threw 17 Tds and 0 picks that year.
2023 he was at 41.8% imside the 20, but better inside the 10 @ 48%. Stafford and Goff were at ~50 and 51. Waldron was fired.
He threw 16 Tds and 2 picks that year.
2024 with Grubb he rebounded a bit and finished at 53% inside the 20(Josh Allen for context is at 52%) and then plumetted to 27 percent inside the 10 yard line.
He tossed 13Tds and 4 picks.
So to recap, with Waldron, Geno had:
33 Tds vs 2 Ints and was consistent if not better in completion percentage the closer we got to the endzone.
With Grubb, Geno had:
13 TDs and 4 Picks and was worse than with Waldron at his best inside the 20, and was league worst inside the 10, with no QB and no offense falling off so precipitously as Geno and the Hawks.
So are the numbers great? No. But he was averaging 1 Int per year in the redzone (inside 20) with Waldron (0 year one and 2 year 2), and that total increased by 4 with Grubb while simultaneously throwing fewer Tds.
If you look at those numbers objectively and consider the OCs have been fired, you dont see a picture of a scattershot QB who panics in the redzone. He tossed 33 Tds and 2 picks with Waldron even with a predictable offense, no run game, poor line and stagnant offense and / play design. Our performance was consistent regardless of where we were inside the 20.
Contrast that to Grubb where if you extrapolate his 2024 numbers across 2 seasons, Geno goes for 26 Tds and 8 Ints i side the 20 with a middle of the pack completion percentage in total inside the 20, but league worst 27% inside the 10.
Thats the scheme, not the qb as numerous analysts and experts have detailed how Grubb's college styled offense would function in open space, but fail in compressed field situations. Its not JUST Grubb, its the inherent difference in the way college offense attack defenses.
The numbers bear that out in Grubbs only year AND when compared to Waldron.
So what does that say about Geno and his coordinator?
That if he could post 33 and 2 with Waldron (who was fired and is no longer in the league) and be middle of the pack in completion percentage that he can do much better with someone competent. We had little to no running game with Waldron or Grubb. Logic says that with better play calling and a formidable ground game that Geno will play better, not wrose. There is literally ZERO data to say he wont improve.
