Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Zod

Looking at the Luke Kuechly forced fumble

61 posts in this topic

That's what I said. When discussing run defense there is no reason to suggest that the DTs need to learn to shed blocks.

3 technique DTs do need to split or shed blocks to gain penetration on run plays. Nose tackles do not necessarily although you want them to work through the double team and grab the runner as he goes through the hole. So I am not sure we totally agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's sad how many people made fun of OP and others for discussing actual football for once instead of posting a 'funny' gif.

The whole "you shouldn't dissect the plays that's for the coaches to know" sounded like the king of religious thinking that gave us the middle ages. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's sad how many people made fun of OP and others for discussing actual football for once instead of posting a 'funny' gif.

The whole "you shouldn't dissect the plays that's for the coaches to know" sounded like the king of religious thinking that gave us the middle ages. lol

I also hate the you don't have coaches tape and aren't a GM/coach therefore any opinion you have should be kept to yourself and is wrong if it goes against the FO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So because the DTs didn't do a great job on a single play and our backup middle linebackers wasn't great, the defense is going to be poor again....................................

Lets not talk about the goal line stand, or the fact that Foster only ran the ball that one play. Lets open up a new thread just to discuss one meaningless in the first preseason game of the year to illustrate nothing of importance.

Got it......................

If you don't want to discuss breaking down this play......Couldn't you chose to simply click on another link instead of b*tching about what other people are talking about? There are a lot of threads that I don't care to read so I just click on the ones that interest me and move on from the others. Maybe you should give it a try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's sad how many people made fun of OP and others for discussing actual football for once instead of posting a 'funny' gif.

The whole "you shouldn't dissect the plays that's for the coaches to know" sounded like the king of religious thinking that gave us the middle ages. lol

I also hate the you don't have coaches tape and aren't a GM/coach therefore any opinion you have should be kept to yourself and is wrong if it goes against the FO.

The issue has nothing to do with analyzing a play. The issue is making too much of the analysis and extrapolating that to the team or suggesting it is symptomatic of a larger problem. That is like taking a single sample and saying that since it was the case in this small example, it is going to be the case across the board. That is a huge leap from one to the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don't want to discuss breaking down this play......Couldn't you chose to simply click on another link instead of b*tching about what other people are talking about? There are a lot of threads that I don't care to read so I just click on the ones that interest me and move on from the others. Maybe you should give it a try.

So why should you get to say what you want in favor of this play yet I should say nothing if I don't agree that the analysis is indicative of a problem in general? You have the right to speak your mind and so do I. I am not telling people they can't do anything they want just suggesting that they are making way too much of a single incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue has nothing to do with analyzing a play. The issue is making too much of the analysis and extrapolating that to the team or suggesting it is symptomatic of a larger problem. That is like taking a single sample and saying that since it was the case in this small example, it is going to be the case across the board. That is a huge leap from one to the other.

Are you saying that Kuechly won't force a fumble every play??? B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you saying that Kuechly won't force a fumble every play??? B)

And I bet he won't have to run back 10 yards from the line of scrimmage to make the play as the D line get gashed for a big run on every play either.

See it is easy.....................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue has nothing to do with analyzing a play. The issue is making too much of the analysis and extrapolating that to the team or suggesting it is symptomatic of a larger problem. That is like taking a single sample and saying that since it was the case in this small example, it is going to be the case across the board. That is a huge leap from one to the other.

The entire D was exposed last season. All those guys played on that play minus Luke and Ron last year.....and Luke was the guy making a play on a ball that was the responsiblity of others.

it isn't totally meaningless. Says a lot of our starters are continuing where they left off.....struggling to make the plays even on simplistic preseason plays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The entire D was exposed last season. All those guys played on that play minus Luke and Ron last year.....and Luke was the guy making a play on a ball that was the responsiblity of others.

it isn't totally meaningless. Says a lot of our starters are continuing where they left off.....struggling to make the plays even on simplistic preseason plays.

We will always disagree when you want to bitch and complain and I want to take a more measured approach and avoid extreme characterizations based on very limited data.

I prefer to wait until at least after the third preseason game to say much of anything about the defense. You prefer to complain at any opportunity. It is just a difference in style and opinion. You have every right to voice yours, I just don't think it is valid without a lot more evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites