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!

     

OL looked bad last night


SBBlue
 Share

Recommended Posts

Darnold has better pocket awareness and bigger brass balls than Teddy Two Yards did so he's actually made our offense better than what it really is.  He steps up in the pocket, avoids sacks with some decent moves, and isn't scared to run the ball if he has to.

Our O-line is atrocious, there are no other words for it.  The two fumbles Sam had was because our line can't hold for three seconds - Sam has to know this and protect the ball from here on out.

I am also tired of Rhule and Brady trying to lift the O-lines spirits by trusting them to get one damn yard on 3rd and 4th and 1s....they can't do it.  Again, we need to implement zone blocking schemes, misdirection and designed runs to get outside....we won't be getting more than one or two yards a carry up the middle or off-tackle. 

 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jayboogieman said:

Moton didn't look like a legit starter for a lot of the game either. That game was just an all around bad performance by the Oline.

He struggled, but obviously im not just talking about this game specifically. He isn't the one that needs to be replaced. We can count everybody else struggling more in the future than moton. 

Edited by CPF4LIFE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The OL is definitely trash. It's extraordinarily obvious. 

We need just accept that is going to be the case for the bulk of the season. Maybe the younger players start to show some sign of being able to help us as the season progresses. That's about all we can hope for.

On the positive side, we have been able to win three straight games with a dumpster fire OL. Says a lot about the scheme and the play of the rest of the offense.

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, outlaw4 said:

Not sure if the "last night" in the title thread is necessary.

I will say we were giving our backs an actual chance later in the game but unsure how much of that was attrition or better execution.

 

IMHO "last night" is necessary. The first two games were against excellent DL's. 

Seeing a substantial increase in pressure against a weaker opponent is NOT good.  

The first two weeks were serviceable.

Darnold should have seen less pressure last night, not more.

 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, BlackPanther21_ said:

As long as we get some guys that are better at the game of football than the bush leaguers we have now (Elflein, Daley, Paradis), I will be happy. 

Miller is crap, Daley is a stop gap. Paradis is bad.

Move Elflein to C, give Brown first team reps this week at RG and fug it, see what Jordan or Christensen can do at LG.

  • Pie 1
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

    • No, the casual fan gets sucked into THIS^^^ kind of thinking, and it's so woefully incorrect that it's almost sad. The first is what I've said numerous times, NOTHING about non guaranteed contracts save the billionaire owners a single penny, because they still have to spend their cap floor, and the only reason teams ever don't spend the full limit, is to then roll it over into the next season to be able to spend more that year. But in the end, owners pay the same amount of money no matter what. The reverse is also the same, that the players in totality make the same amount of money as well, because in your example of Clowney not getting that money this year, it will go to another player, as the cap needs to be spent. And you say how we just cut Clowney after we gave him the 2 year contract, but everyone including Clowney's agent and himself, knew when it was signed, that it was more likely to be a 1 year contract than a 2 with how it was structured.  The 2nd year was just to be able to spread out the cap hit and he was always most likely going to end up getting traded or cut. It's why agents and players don't care about the total money in a contract, it's always and only been about the guaranteed money, as the years and overall value are meaningless, always have been, always will be.
    • Agents will have their 1st round picks hold out until the pay structure of their contract is to their liking, not how much money they'll get or even how much is guaranteed, just the when/how they will get the money over the course of the contract. If they're willing to recommend those players hold our, do you really think they won't do it for 2nd rounders to guarantee them an extra 10% of their entire rookie contract?
    • If BY continues to develop.  XL learns how to catch with his speed. Tet lives up to his hype... THEN Brooks comes back.. dammmmmmmmmmmmmm
×
×
  • Create New...