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!

     

Looking at the Gamesheet


SaltAndPepper
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, 45catfan said:

True, but I thought fans wanted to get rid of Fox/Rivera "old school" football?  I'm down with whatever wins us games, new school or old school, it doesn't matter to me.

Rookie QB in his first start and you see that your defense is playing well?  I think you have to be flexible in your gameplan.

  • Pie 3
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, NAS said:

I do wonder if we ran the ball 40 times without turnovers, we probably win that game.  

 

24 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

True, but I thought fans wanted to get rid of Fox/Rivera "old school" football?  I'm down with whatever wins us games, new school or old school, it doesn't matter to me.

Like the Browns did with a veteran QB?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My only concern is the Horn injury.  Yes, we gave up 17 points off turnovers, but they torched Henderson--and a TE beat him deep.  No excuse for that.

I would not be surprised to see us bring in (or up) someone.  If you need proof of his heart, watch him when he has a chance to make a tackle--especially in a crowd. Nobody is that un-athletic. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Take out Watson's carries and yes, about half.  He was the force.  True bell cow RBs are a thing of the past.  Even solid RB 1's yield significant time to back ups for--what the NBA likes to say "load management."

why would I take out Watson's carries? 2 were designed runs.. and the other was a TD run.  Would we remove Bryce's runs if we ran the ball 8 more times to hit 40?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

why would I take out Watson's carries? 2 were designed runs.. and the other was a TD run.  Would we remove Bryce's runs if we ran the ball 8 more times to hit 40?

Splitting hairs here, yes QB runs count, but effectiveness of a rushing attack generally doesn't hinge on your QB.  Chubb>>>>>>>>>>>>>Sanders/Hubbard

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

    • First, apologies @MHS831, I know you began this about tackles, and it was good. But... Frank, your post is just another Bryce sucks post. You obviously believe, like your buddy, that if we draft a WR it's all about evaluating Bryce Young or coddling Bryce Young. In short, it would be about improving the damned team. If anything, if Bryce is as destined to fail (or is already a failure right now... irredeemable), then another playmaker at WR would just seal the envelope and send him on his way. In my world, that's a good thing.  If some of you think that Bryce is a lame duck, then why wouldn't you want to set the offense up for the next QB to come in and be dropped into the offense to have success? Or, maybe you think it's all a moot point anyway because Tepper sucks, Dan Morgan sucks, Canales sucks, Ejiro sucks, Brandt Tilis sucks---everybidy sucks! If that's the case, then why does anyone care who or what we draft? Obviously some of you have all the answers and can run a gotdamn franchise better than the FO does now.
    • Yeah man, idk. I’m not super big on looking at the position group overall and damning the group. I’ll do the same with less words for WR. I think Proctor is the ultimate fit because he could be your future left or right tackle or left or right guard. Guys a starter, how much Zavala, Christensen, Curhan, and Corbett did we see last year again? Mauigoa will not be there when we pick, but you take him for the same reason you take Proctor minus maybe the LT. Freeling *could* be an upgrade at LT for the future. You don’t take Miller or Iheanahor because the position flexibility isn’t there, likely RT only guys. Those Utah guys are light in the ass, don’t want. Now I do WR. All extremely unproductive when compared to previous Round 1 WR. Tate- Gone Lemon- Complete player, not a burner, would take at 19 Tyson- Made of glass, Colorado washout  Cooper- Not the best hands. Like 300 of his yards were lucky ass stumble blooper looking poo. Bernard gives you similar but better in the 2nd. KC- Slaps then catches the ball. Lightning fast for about 20 yards. Good return man. poo QBs probably more to unlock. Would take at 19 if Proctor, Freeling, Lemon were gone. Washington guy- Lumbers, the smoothness Canales hyped for TMac, not there with him. We need a different style player.    
    • Logically yes. Boston has the right balance though. Jalen Brown is #2 in the paint and their best shooters are 17th and 19th. While our best shooters are #1 and #2 and we have one player in the top 50 for points in the paint. And my understanding looking at the information I just referenced is we were basically at the exact same paint percentage last year in Charles Lee's offense. At the end of the day we either want to compete for a playoff series winner and the finals or we just want to stumble our way to another play in. We've already done that with James Borrego.
×
×
  • Create New...