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!

     

Matt Rhule explains deactivating Deonte Brown


Zod
 Share

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Carl Spackler said:

And this ain't like Ron, how?

this isn't like Ron.  Ron once caught heat for punting on the opponents 35 because he felt being conservative was more important than points.   This is something totally different and new. 

 

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Zod said:

Maybe he got winded. I don't know. I am done guessing with this group. This is Norwell sitting behind Amini all over again. 

Not at all. I remember bumping into Norwell when he first got to Charlotte. Huge guy, but athletic, not someone struggling with his weight. He was like Jordan Gross during his time here, chubby around the middle, but only because he needed to be to anchor himself against d linemen. If Deonte still has conditioning issues, then he's a liability, especially if he only plays one position. Hopefully these new sports science guys Rhule uses will get him into game shape fast. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your starting OL were getting blown into the backfield every play at least brown can hold his ground long enough for a freakin play to develop. They are gonna getting Darnold killed before he has any time to establish himself here. It blows my mind how people on here just accepted them not even trying to protect him. Darnold has injury history, he is nowhere near a iron man. 

Edited by CPF4LIFE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Zod said:

He was the Giants OL coach I thought

he was an assistant OL coach for one season.   

but I don't think that earned him the narrative as an OL expert.   I have never heard it at least.  He has a random coaching year basically everywhere on O or D.   Resume always read like a jack of all trades type guy from a positional perspective.   Which makes sense if your goal is HC. 

  • Beer 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

    • I’m not necessarily advocating sticking with Bryce. His highs show the ability is there, but there’s enough bad film out there to doubt that he can consistently enough play at a high enough level. But this video from Brett Kollman is a pretty good argument to give it a bit more time, whether that be rolling with Bryce just next year or picking up his 5th year option (not extending him).      The gist is that the structural (wider hashes) and rule (3 yd vs 1 yd thresholds for intelligible offensive lineman downfield penalties) differences in the college and NFL have led to wildly different play calling and scheme diets in college. There is much more shotgun and RPO calls in college and screen/quick throws. This simply doesn’t set up young QBs to be able to play under center, which is more preferred in the NFL due to RBs being able to more effectively run out of that formation.  They don’t know how to do it and have to learn. Yes, the NFL has trended more toward college style offense in the last decade or so, but it isn’t that pronounced and is more out of necessity than desire. And on top of all that, they ask the young QBs to do all this learning with coaching and other personnel churn going on around them.  Bad results lead to coaches getting fired and new ones with different ideas on scheme and footwork and different terminology and playbooks coming in. It makes it harder on those young QBs to learn.     So we may drop Bryce for a young QB starter in the draft and be in a similar situation. With a QB who is going to take years to learn how to operate in an NFL style offense and will struggle along the way.  So you have to weigh whether the struggles we see from Bryce are more due to this learning process vs solely physical limitations on his part. It’s almost undoubtedly a bit of both, but the answer to that question I think dictates your strategy at QB over the next few years. And of course, you have to consider what the alternatives available are.    I’m neither a Bryce hater or a Bryce Stan and I don’t have an answer to that question. But I do fear that if we move on from him, unless it’s for an established player, we’re just in for continued frustration on the QB front because it’s going to take a few years for a college QB to develop (Drake Maye’s don’t grow on trees). 
    • The defense has pulled that feat off this season though.  Multiple times. offense has not had a single good first half all season.  Only and good opening scripted drive paired with disappointing play.  defense has been the actual unit you can measure real and consistent improvement IMO.  Still holes and flaws to it that aren’t going away until new bodies get here but they really are the story of the season IMO
    • One thing about RB's and LB's is they are going to get hurt. It's inevitable. Having a fresh Chuba is not a bad thing.  My only criticism of this entire situation is that I wish our staff would adjust personnel to matchup a little better. I think Chuba is a lot better than Rico against the stacked boxes we've seen the last two weeks. They are very different backs with very different strengths, and I love them both. Rico is so good at identifying the hole early, and hitting it full speed early. He's much better at breaking the big run. Chuba is a much more patient back, and finds 3 yards when there's nothing there better than Rico.  It's in no way a criticism of either, but I think Chuba would have had more success than Rico the way the Saints and Falcons attacked us from a Defensive standpoint.  When you put 9 in the box, often times there is no hole to attack. 
×
×
  • Create New...