Archived

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

hepcat

4th Quarter Defense

17 posts in this topic

D does play soft too often at the end.....

But this week they still did enough early on where they shouldn't of had to worry about a team having a shot. Carolina's offense scored a measly 14 pts. D held Tampa to 13 before they overtime sending score.

D just needs the O to score about 20 pts per game and we win all these games. Make opponents score on the D and don't give them freebies.

You my friend couldn't be more wrong if your up 21-13 with 50 seconds left and the offense has no timeouts you should win that game. The offense never got a chance to step back on the field. They had to sit which as the defense once again folded when it mattered

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's fully fuging retarded to, in the fourth quarter when you have the lead and it's only two minutes left, to COMPLETELY change your gameplan from what has been working THE ENTIRE GAME to some stupid ass "Play it Safe" soft ass crap.

Hey, it aint broke so let's fix it! These nitwits don't trust their players to execute, that's what it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

James Anderson said in a recent interview that Rivera isn't hands on at all when it comes to defense, all the schemes and play calling is McDermott.

It says Rivera's scheme, it's not his scheme so it isn't funny.

it would be nice for all of us to come to agreement here. people want to knock mcdoormat when things suck for the d, then say rr has taken over the d is the reason for the improvement.

what can we compare our inept offense too? air molecules because our offense is essentially invisible?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who cares who is responsible for the D? Rivera is HC. If D sucks, O sucks, whatever, it falls on Rivera. Rivera is the one who picked the coordinators and assistants anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's fully fuging retarded to, in the fourth quarter when you have the lead and it's only two minutes left, to COMPLETELY change your gameplan from what has been working THE ENTIRE GAME to some stupid ass "Play it Safe" soft ass crap.

Hey, it aint broke so let's fix it! These nitwits don't trust their players to execute, that's what it is.

Just had a thought after reading this post....Is it possible, like the defense changing in the 4th when things are going so well, that this is the EXACT same thing that happened with our 2011 offense vs our 2012 offense?

Is it possible that Ron's staff over thinks everything and starts changing things that aren't even broken like our offense last year to read option?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What ron has shown this season is what other teams knew would happen if they hired him.. all of this is ultimately marty hurney's fault for hiring the guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had a thought after reading this post....Is it possible, like the defense changing in the 4th when things are going so well, that this is the EXACT same thing that happened with our 2011 offense vs our 2012 offense?

Is it possible that Ron's staff over thinks everything and starts changing things that aren't even broken like our offense last year to read option?

I never thought about that. You know, that would explain a lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Posts

    • From the ssa wiki part on its history: The Social Security law was very unpopular among many groups, especially farmers, who resented the additional taxes and feared they would never be made good. They lobbied hard for exclusion. Furthermore, the Treasury realized how difficult it would be to set up payroll deduction plans for farmers, for housekeepers who employed maids, and for nonprofit groups; therefore they were excluded. State employees were excluded for constitutional reasons (the federal government cannot tax state government). Federal employees were also excluded. Many textbooks, however, falsely indicate that the exclusions were the product of southern racial hostility toward blacks; there is no evidence of that in the record.[15] Other scholars have replicated and endorsed DeWitt's analysis, agreeing that the exclusions were made by policy experts on technical grounds and were not grounded on racial hostility. Rodems and Shaefer note in all other countries unemployment insurance programs "excluded domestic and agricultural workers when they were first implemented, a fact that the key New Deal policy makers were well aware of.   Interesting stuff. 
    • After eating clean for a while, I can't eat bojangles, way too much salt.
    • this is an old story that anti-progressive media is pushing. all that happened is she applied for a loan for the college, for which they're required to submit a list of their donations so the office knows that they're able to pay back the loans. she submitted the list but included bequeathmets on the donor list instead of as a separate list, assuming they counted as donations. that's it. that's the entire story. it's a minor paperwork error that comes with a small fine.