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!

     

Go ahead, admit it. Huddle confessionals.


Ivan The Awesome
 Share

Recommended Posts

The two spots that I felt like were our weakness were LBs and OL. I think it has to be LBs that I eat the crow for, at least for now. Because I honestly think our o-line is still a little bit of hot garbage. Run blocking seems horrible. Pass blocking looks to be better than horrible, but I'm not sure how much of that is the line and how much of that is Darnold and the coaches. I think we are scheming around the horribleness. Not sold on OL yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheRumGone said:

This is an extremely premature thread. Two games against the worst team in the league and a saints team who didn’t have half a dozen top shelf players playing as well as a bunch of offensive coaches out with covid. Real tests for me in the first half of the season are the Vikings, Eagles and Dallas. Vikings are much, much better than their record indicates and the Eagles and Dallas have explosive offenses. We come out of the first 8 games with a 7-1 or 6-2 record I’ll feel more confident going forward. The real tests on this schedule are the Bucs, Cardinals and Bills. Those are the elite teams we face this year. I wanna see how we play against them before I eat crow on anything.

Darnold is playing steady, solid football and that’s great. Before the season I predicted this would be his best statistical season but that the real tests would be how he performs in big moments. Remember we’re trying to see if he’s a franchise qb going forward. If we want to give him that bigger contract he needs to prove he’s a guy you can trust to make plays in big moments, in big games. 

Did you read the original post?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Moo Daeng said:

Did you read the original post?

Yes. It’s too early to eat crow on anything “after two games” against subpar opponents.
 

The biggest thing for me would be Darnold. I’ve been pretty vocal that I didn’t like the move and thought it was even worse to not bring in a drafted rookie to compete against him. That’s still up in the air after two games for everything i said in my original post. 

Edited by TheRumGone
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 think he did a solid job.  Honestly I liked his post game interview the best.  He gave himself a C and said he left a lot out on the field.  That kind of attitude can carry him far.
    • This is lacking a fairly considerable amount of context. For one, Adams(age 22) started 12 of 16 games, had 38 rec, 446 yds and 3 TD's on 66 targets(18 less, with 2 less games started). The main thing missing here is that the top two WR's for Green Bay that year combined for about 2800 yds and 25 TD's. Now if you want to throw a more accurate dart at Adams, take a look at year two. This year the production was spread around considerably and Adams didn't stand out from that pack(pun not intended).  So, if XL struggles mightily this season, I would probably keep that comparison in your quiver to counter argue. I would suggest that I don't think that scenario is probably very accurate for most HOF caliber WR's taken in the first round over the past 15 or so years. Adams was the 89th pick overall, as well. A little different hill to climb than XL, although not massively.
    • to clarify I am not referring to Will Levis.  Not knowingly.   I just made that up and tried to use a reasonable guesstimate of what else was done.  That sounded in the ballpark.  At one time I did look it all up and there were several teams that had much more successful days downfield.   If that happened to be Levis' actual numbers than it's more of a lucky coincidence.  If memory serves, it wasn't just Will Levis that brought the claim into question, it was SEVERAL teams had better days.  and you are missing my entire point of the subjective nature of it all.  If PFF employee Doug watched Bryce's film and then used his same unique subjective vantage point to grade all 31 other starting QBs.  Then dumped into into a spread sheet, it would a subjective Doug take but at least it would be a level uniform subjectivity.   The grades are done by various people.  All watching and applying their own subjective view to a play.  Everyone isn't going to grade incompletions out the same.  Or completions.   So when you dump it all into a spread sheet and hit sort.....it's not actually a statement of fact as portrayed.  Which is why you sometimes get some head scratching stuff.  I'm not reframing anything.   I don't think.  I just wasn't going to look it all back up so I was talking vaguely off the general issue I have with PFF and treating any random claim they make as the truth. 
×
×
  • Create New...