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!

     

CMC - Bad football is not being coached, it's the players.


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Smithers said:

In all fairness, tape shows receivers open early on in route development.  Here is the issue - Baker isn’t seeing the field and doesn’t throw at the point the play is designed to be executed at.  By the time he does unload, guys are simply running extended routes that eventually lead them to be close to each other.  Our offensive issues are Bakers fault, plain and simple.  

Not that plain and not that simple. Our play calling is borderline college/high school. There's no deception, Baker is taking almost every snap out of the shotgun, and we have one of the easiest offenses in the NFL to read and game plan for. Baker is surely fugging up his part, but make no mistake McAdoo and Rhule are not doing him or this offense any favors. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is no entirely true. Bad plays are being called. Ian Thomas is being asked to block DEs one on one on many of our run plays, yet he gets beaten nearly every time. That means you don't call plays where Ian is set up to fail. That is on the OC.

The players do share the blame. Sometimes Icky goes into pass blocking when we are running a run play. Sometimes our receivers look like they are not giving 100% effort. And finally Baker is ignoring players who are open down field for short completions. The ball has to go downfield when players are open for potential TDs. We're not getting those TDs because of Baker.

 

Edited by pantherj
  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ian is good at catching easy passes. Ian is bad at catching tough passes. Ian is a pass catching TE who is being asked to block all the time against DEs one on one. McAdoo loves scheming up pass plays, and he has some really ones at just the right time, but on run plays I feel like he isn't even watching. It's like he doesn't care if our run plays don't work. He doesn't care if Ian can't block the play. It's like he just wants to get to the next pass play, and the pass plays are working. The problem is Baker is not going deep when the play is there to be made. That demoralizes our receivers and they look like they're half assing it out there sometimes. There were about 4 plays against AZ that would have been TDs if Baker had thrown it deep. 

It think against SF Baker is going to throw a lot of deep passes because I'm sure he's being shown what he missed against AZ. Hell he missed even more against the Browns. We have to have a QB who will go deep when Mac is calling all these really good deep pass plays. If we get nothing out of them then that is on Baker. He's going deep a lot against SF is my prediction. If he doesn't, then by the end of the season he'll be a career backup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean, I'm not here to defend Rhule. I want him gone, but I have to say that I was at the NYG game and there were so many open receivers ( especially Shi that game I believe ). It was like someone said before, they were open quick but the ball never got out quick. I also believe that offense doesn't have anyone taking over and getting these guys fired up. I know motivation starts from coaching and they didn't  places like coaching too but there is no Cam ( and there never will be ), Jake, 89 bottom line that isn't taking anyone's slacking poo. Those guys were on your ass if you weren't giving 100% out there ( Steve Smith probably a little too much LMAO ). I thought Baker would be that guy, he sure talks a lot, but he ain't it. 

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

    • lol, that second part is quite literally one of the dumbest things ever. Having or not having guaranteed contracts has absolutely nothing to do with how much these billionaires have to pay.  Because there is a hard cap and a minimum cap spend requirement, and teams either use their cap or roll it over to use it all the next year, so the owners have to pay the same amount of money in the end no matter what. Having fully guaranteed contracts in the NFL would only hurt salary cap management, and thus would end up screwing over the team and its fan base when teams kiss on signings as they take up cap room that is needed to improve the roster. Look at the Browns with Watson, they gave him the fully guaranteed deal and all it’s doing is sucking up massive cap space now.  If they hadn’t done that, the owner would still be paying the same amount of money each year as that cap space would still be used elsewhere. If you want to argue for fully guaranteed contracts because the players deserve it, that’s an entirely different argument and a fair one to discuss.  But anyone against fully guaranteed deals isn’t doing it to argue for the billionaire owners.
    • Start posting in threads in the other forums instead of just creating threads. No one comes over here so you aren't starting conversations.  Get your ass up to 100 posts. It's not that hard. Don't create 100 posts. Contribute to conversations. 
    • Ryabkin could be the steal of the draft, he was a Top 10 pick heading into last season and had a rough year.  Lots of GMs passed on him because of that and his workouts. Pick has really high upside and Svech should be able to translate Rod tearing his arse a new one for making dumb plays since Svech has had several years of it.  🤣😂
×
×
  • Create New...