Continuing Attacking Gamble, Good Idea Or Bad Idea?
Posted 07 January 2009 - 12:32 AM
Havent been too many games where they just kept throwing to Gamble, that I remember. But the ones I remember, he picked up on it and almost had a INT. Chi game, he could have had 2. IMO, the Packers game... call it a INT or a strip cause it was one of them. He got burned by Driver, a few plays later he made that play reading the slant. He dropped a lot of potential INT, as well as our whole back field
Think its a good idea to test him all game?
Posted 07 January 2009 - 12:33 AM
Posted 07 January 2009 - 12:35 AM
But I mean from opposing teams stand point
Posted 07 January 2009 - 12:49 AM
If they go to a four receiver set and Fitzgerald starts to go nuts we are better off doubling him with a safety and taking our chances with one of the other guys particularly if Boldin is nicked up and less than 100%. We haven't been running alot of man defense anyway preferring a zone so I don't know if Darrin knows something we don't or is just needing material for a column. A game played in 2005 against a quarterback currently on our team against corners and a secondary that don't even play the same coverages as then, seems pretty irrelevant to the game coming up on Saturday.
Posted 07 January 2009 - 01:08 AM
I was thinking like this only due to something both the Eagles and Ohio state both did in their last games that I seen. The eagles avoided running a screen (something they do a lot normally) until they really needed to put a dagger in Minni and it burned them for a long TD. Using something that works most when Minni. forgot about it.
Ohio state kept blitzing and waited for a play where Colt McCoy was playing aggressive and seen the slot guy uncovered against zone on a quick slant (which was open most all game for Colt). The guys blitzing both backed off at the snap and should have had an easy INT, as if they almost knew that Colt was going to the slot man against the zone and he played right into their D after it was open most all game.
I think we may let AZ think they have a lot going for them on certain plays and then when we most need it, we'll switch it up in our favor when we see they're going to attack the same spot again. Like I said, maybe I'm dead wrong, but it seems now days D's set up to make the offense do what they want when needed in the long run. This all could be lack of sleep talking too lol.
Edited by Fright, 07 January 2009 - 01:11 AM.
Posted 07 January 2009 - 01:22 AM
Posted 07 January 2009 - 01:25 AM
Posted 07 January 2009 - 02:16 AM
Posted 07 January 2009 - 10:04 AM
Posted 07 January 2009 - 11:26 AM
I think the whole entire team will be playing better now in a playoff game, Lucas might come to reality and go back to normal and get a bit more pumped sense its a playoff game....although i don't know how he wasn't pumped in that game against the bucs in Charlotte where he got burned A LOT.
To go to Lucas's defense, in the Bucs game it wasn't totally his fault. Even Marshall came out and let everyone know it wasn't. Marshall and Godfrey wasn't where they should have bee which caused Lucas to look silly out there. I expect a whole different D come sat. In front of our home crowd and on national tv with a chance to showcase what they can do to a top rated offense.
Posted 07 January 2009 - 11:58 AM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users