Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Worley looked horrible last night


ncsfinest21

Recommended Posts

He got out of position alot and got beat once but could've gotten beat more than that due to the rain. I believe he is the weak link in our defense. Henne targeted him a couple times as hurns burnt him. Hopefully we are just playing vanilla defense but regardless he has to make sure he isnt getting burnt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was never out of position. His technique needed a bit refinement in staying with his man, but hip flexibility has been an issue since last year. 

On that one big play, Worley didn't drop his hips enough and turn, leading to that wide open reception. He had some nice run plays and covered okay, but I would say it wasn't his best game by any stretch.

Hope that fixes by season start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's not garbage and he was not completely out of position but he does need to tighten it up.  Our D is sick all around so in comparison to the other guys we've got he & Mike Adams are the weakest links.  Him getting beat is the nature of the game.  Good throws and good receivers in conjuction are very hard to stop, even for the best of corners.  He does need to tighten up and be aware that opposing offenses will try to exploit him.  I think he'll be fine once things really get going.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Mojo said:

He's not garbage and he was not completely out of position but he does need to tighten it up.  Our D is sick all around so in comparison to the other guys we've got he & Mike Adams are the weakest links.  Him getting beat is the nature of the game.  Good throws and good receivers in conjuction are very hard to stop, even for the best of corners.  He does need to tighten up and be aware that opposing offenses will try to exploit him.  I think he'll be fine once things really get going.

I don't know about that he'll be fine but honestly what team has no weak links we will have to learn to compensate for that. Mainly with pass rush but yea he's seems to not have the needed recovery speed he's usually in place but a step behind time  and time again but we'll definetly be strong determine factor of how strong is  masking one or two weak spots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, trucpfan said:

I don't know about that he'll be fine but honestly what team has no weak links we will have to learn to compensate for that. Mainly with pass rush but yea he's seems to not have the needed recovery speed he's usually in place but a step behind time  and time again but we'll definetly be strong determine factor of how strong is  masking one or two weak spots.

Tomato Tomatto.  Me saying he'll be fine implies the possibility of defensive scheming.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Lot of different agendas dictating opinions.  I don’t think it was the best use of money with Hunt, specifically, but the concept of OL, I am a fan. I didn’t complain a ton because I am a believer in winning up front, on both sides of the ball. I’d rather have stout fronts than fancy WRs. I have complained some about Hunt not being worth his deal, after seeing him get pushed around in a game or two. It’s no crusade. And have complained in the context of shorting the defense.   They have leveled out the FA imbalance with the dual big signings this offseason, and it has always been the draft picks I am most protective of. Anyway The picks are the real imbalance. If you did a trade chart value of the picks we directly gave up for Bryce, and added the support picks invested for skill players, and put that on one side… then put the little 3 3rd rounders and a 2nd that the defense got over three years on the other it would be hugely out of balance. I just want the balance restored. Defense is still owed.    
    • I'm one of the ones that won't let it go because it didn't solve the problem. We didn't address the center position which was a huge mistake. We were in position to easily take 2 or the top IOL. Instead of drafting JPJ over XL or Frazier over Brooks, we relied on an oft injured guard to center conversion and lo and behold, it failed as predicted. XL looks like a 1 year college wonder and an injured Brooks hasn't even surpassed Eric Shelton.  Bryce was also benched for poor performance, so the issue that many claimed was solely bad oline play wasn't. It didn't fix him bailing out of tight pockets because of being unable to see the field or him refusing to work on his atrocious footwork. Then there's the $$$. Lewis got a good guard payday. Hunt got a tackle payday. Pay tackles, draft guards, if you can.  I have no issues addressing problems through FA. It was not addressing C at all that's been the issue and still has been. Ryan Kalil was the anchor of our offensive line. We had years of solid center play and it showed. Now we're still piecemealing the center position with an expensive oline and it's still a shitshow. Why? Because the player responsible for what happens on the line presnap has little to no experience doing it. We did acquire a FA center this year finally. We'll see how much that impacts the line.  Spending on a center, whether it be through draft or FA is not bad. It's not a position that can have anyone just thrown in with no drop off in performance. A great center lifts the play of the guards on each side.  I don't like how we've built the line because we've ignored the hinge pin that everyone counts on every play. And the reality of the situation is, it didn't solve the actual problems with Bryce because those have nothing to do with the oline. 
    • Haha!!! That's true. Also carry Tomahawks, ballistic missiles, fighter jets, VSTOL aircraft, etc., but none of them clog up the crappers. 
×
×
  • Create New...