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!

     

The Bucs won't rest starters, will play to win


LinvilleGorge
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, TheProcess said:

They NEED to win!  Yes the Packers have the bye and home field locked up, but they want that 2nd seed. They want home field until NFC Championship game, and probably need it without Godwin and AB, while also having a depleted secondary. Also, as the 2nd seed they would get home field in NFC championship if somebody beats the Packers. They definitely don't want the 4th seed and travel to the Packers early

They said during the game last night that GB had lost a few playoff games at home. So being the #2 seed is important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, rayzor said:

Must be nice to be in that situation.

Hey, we got a plan though.  One that is totally working.   1000%.  Man o man, if you could see what Matt Rhule sees.  What goes on not in the games or practice or camp.   If you could see the rest of it.  Probably would make you cry tears of something. 
 

image.gif.73a43af1e5a7932abb3c15d27c45350d.gif

 

  • Pie 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SmokinwithWilly said:

I hope they use us as a tune up game before the playoffs. I'd settle for an NFL record for points against. I know no member of the current roster really would want to be a part of that, but it might be the only way for them not to have to endure 17 more games of embarrassment next year. 

If we're going to be their tune up game, the Bucs will be misfiring on all cylinders when they have to face an actual opponent.

I think that's worth taking a massive L.

  • 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

    • He can’t even learn to run routes. No chance in hell he can do both that and pick up blocking schemes 
    • Well he had essentially a 70% completion rate for almost three thousand yards.  Biggest issues were awkward and inconsistent release.  I wouldn't call arm strength bad, but not great.    
    • I see him being better and most of that is a few downfield passes that were seemingly non existent.    But it is what is around him that has dictated the trajectory more than the quarterbacking. He is game manager level and unable to dictate to defenses.  And even if I am wrong and he is the reason we ‘upwarded’, we are bumping our heads on the ceiling and only making meager gains. If it is an incline it is awfully shallow degree wise. Like a finance graph that tracks your progress and hovers around the rate of inflation. Barely breaking even.  Is that where you want your money?  We make up these deadlines expectations and generally he does the minimum of what he needs to do to hang around.    It does not encourage me to believe that when we get into a game against a good run d that we cannot break down with our run game, to believe that we can pivot to the air and successfully counter their strategy.  But they run it back again. Of course I am gunshy of a repeat of the same thing we have watched for three years.    oh, and yes his durability is his most impressive positive for my money. I fear the other shoe dropping on that and the contractual consequences that will follow.   Last  of all, too late to edit my mistake here but would like to acknowledge it: the last three years has done very little to convince me that I was not wrong in not wanting him. One too many “not”s. 
×
×
  • Create New...