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!

     

Biggest glaring redzone weakness?


micnificent28
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, stbugs said:

Agree. Heck, two good throws and no one is talking about Brady or RZ at all. The fumble doesn’t even happen.

I still agree with the others that the “biggest” issue is that we can’t run up the middle. It’s such a big part of GL offense, especially the play action fake. It also brings in the S/LBers tighter and makes those fades and other passes more likely to be 1 on 1s.

we defintely have a personel issue when it comes to that. Hopefiuly once the coaches make the change and bring in Brown/Christenson to play on the line, this is no longer an issue. But, that doesnt solve for MP

😞

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, TrevorLaurenceTime22 said:

IT'S definitely play calling they still try to get too cute.

I was told I was overreacting when I jumped on Rhule's comments not to worry about Red Zone Offense in preseason since it was only vanilla stuff, no trick plays, etc.   But I repeat, it's very VERY concerning if we can only win in the Red Zone with cute trick plays.  Love CMC to death, but running him up the middle near the goal line on 3rd and 1 or 4th and 1 is not often successful.

  • Pie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, KB_fan said:

I was told I was overreacting when I jumped on Rhule's comments not to worry about Red Zone Offense in preseason since it was only vanilla stuff, no trick plays, etc.   But I repeat, it's very VERY concerning if we can only win in the Red Zone with cute trick plays.  Love CMC to death, but running him up the middle near the goal line on 3rd and 1 or 4th and 1 is not often successful.

I agree completely, RedZone plays need to be about execution not finesse. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, micnificent28 said:

I have no idea what this coaching staff has against thumpers and or goalinebacks but, it has been clear to me over the years CMC is fantastic in space* he can make the wow plays the eye opening catches.. but 4th and you gotta have it and they know it's coming... just isn't the situation you want to put him in.

If you want to throw him a swing or something on 4th. I'm all for it.. but don't just hammer him in there like Tolbert or cam we haven't had a presence like that since those guys left or Stewart for that matter. I'm not sure how we sign guys like arnold as backup tightens and gio the new designated fullback and no rb on the roster pushes 220( Royse freeman is 238)*.  

I'm not saying that hammering it in on 4th and 1 is the only way to go but you damn well better have the threat that you can muscle up and punch it in if need be. This role needs to be addressed in tight ball games or those situations could result in losses down the road.

 

If the OL wouldn't get stalemated every time he'd score.

 

Emmitt Smith didn't have all those TDs because he was fast or powerful. 

He had holes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, stbugs said:

Huh? You need to be both and it’s OK to be good at both. We can’t really run the ball because the D is much tighter and closer to the LOS so our interior OL getting no push means we have to pass or run outside/trick play like QB draw.

We don't have the personnel to be both. That should have been clear.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, frankw said:

He isn't a bruiser by any means but today we kept running him up the middle like he was Stephen Davis. He's a threat in the open field use him as such but good grief we were predictable.

Cmac has busted plenty of 40 plus yard tds right between the tackles. 

The problem is blocking not the back.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Legette is a nice prospect, with lots of upside.  But this guy saying he is better than Harrison, Odunze, and Nabors, sorry but he's out of his ever loving mind.  
    • That albatross still hung around our neck. We paid 20 million in dead cap for a second round pick and lost cmc. Paid 16 million in dead cap for moore to be traded to Chicago   Owed burns nothing but wouldn't trade him for 2 first round picks. Shitterer was beyond the most incompetent gm I've ever seen.
    • I did a lot of research on Xavier Legette for the past few weeks, and as some of you know, I was in favor of making him our first pick. I must say that I got tired of going back and forth seemingly every other day about X, and was so ready for the draft to come in order for the team to "put up or shut up" where X was concerned, and enable discussions on X to move forward. X was (is) the most polarizing player discussed on the Huddle in terms pick 33, and that brought a lot of contentious discussion as well as information. See, you never know what to believe during the draft season, and ever since the Senior Bowl, hints and outright stories of the Panthers' and X's mutual attraction appeared and ramped up so easily, that it was almost unbelievable. So, even though I liked X, and really figured that he should be the pick, the ease of which everything fell into place and the outside noise of different analysts made me lose a little conviction. But one ex-scout developed unshakable conviction all the way through.  Dan Kelly, who used to scout for the Jets back in the day, chose Xavier Legette as the top receiver in the 2024 draft class. I came across his thoughts weeks ago, but I'm sharing them now just to give you some positive food for thought since X is indeed a Panther. There is no boom-or-bust aspect to X in Kelly's estimation, as X is reminiscent of a damned good one. "This Gamecocks receiver conjures memories of how Pro Football Hall of Fame wide receiver Art Monk — the former Washington star — ran his routes." "Legette's sudden and spontaneous moves win initial route leverage against corners and then he wins again at route breakpoints." For as critical as some have been of X's release off the line, when I look at X work, I can't say that Kelly is wrong here. X certainly seems to get open (though admittedly sometimes he just out-physicals the DBs ). "Legette is the best in this draft class at "Mossin'" defenders — that is acrobatically outjumping corners for passes and coming down with circus catches. Legette isn't the next Moss, but he is darn good. He can go deep or sell the deep route well before settling back underneath and making those vitally important chain-moving intermediate-level receptions (11-19 yards)." https://www.yardbarker.com/nfl/articles/scouts_view_the_top_receiver_in_the_nfl_draft_isnt_who_you_think/s1_13132_39987216 On Kelly's own site, First Round Mock, he was a little more specific: "Legette has this spontaneous and impulsive ability to put little moves on corners, whether releasing from the line of scrimmage...or...when going deep. Either way, it’s enough to earn Legette route leverage (position advantage against the cornerback he’s matched up against)." There's that term again: route leverage. Say what you want about X, but he knows how to get it. Lastly, within the scouting report, Kelly really mentions the term again without saying it. "Strong target who showed high-level receiving skills beyond his years...Runs routes to get open rather than well-defined routes which makes him tough to cover. Gets to the spot..." That's ironic, no? X in his roughness makes it ugly for defensive backs to cover him. For me, this was an epiphany when I was looking at some of his clips. Yeah, he may not be the technician that a Diontae Johnson or (dare I say) a Ladd McConkey is, but he always seemed to get where he needed to be. He just simply is not built to be bullied or redirected from the task at hand, and I don't think that's a characteristic or talent (if you will) that can be taught. Sure, he'll be polished up as best that the coaches can, and perhaps that will allow him a smoother release. And I'm sure that the coaches will devise ways to scheme him open, but he's built---physically and mentally to get to where he's going. You saw it last season, and you're going to see it in the pros. Watch what I'm saying. https://firstroundmock.com/2024/02/xavier-legette-reminds-former-nfl-scout-of-these-legends/
×
×
  • Create New...