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!

     

38/21


Frank9999
 Share

Recommended Posts

41 minutes ago, CRA said:

see this is bad coaching though.  you see this all the time.  that's on the staff.   another reason why Frank shouldn't call games.  dude is lost in his poo playcalling.  Frank botching all kinds of basics too.  Saw that Sunday.   Bryce hasn't been good.  It's tough to argue there is any evidence this staff is able to help this kid out. 

I think they need to install a slow no huddle.   Cam thrived in it.  You can run Frank's simplistic game out of that. QB gets to the line early.  Call ready.  Plenty of time to relax, check out the landscape, time is on your side. 

Oh I agree 100%.  Seems like this organization has always had a difficult time getting to the LOS with 15 seconds left.  Crazy stuff 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Smithers said:

I have - I see a guy who isn’t used to losing who is frustrated by losing.  I don’t see a guy doubting his physical abilities.  

Frustration is one thing. This dude is downright dejected. He looked lost for answers and on the borderline of just breaking down and crying at the presser.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Varking said:

I don’t know if it’s the player or the playcalling or if it’s a mix of both. I know our offense used to look like poo until Riverboat showed up and let the offense gamble and go for it and keep drives going. I’ve closely followed the Bears because of Justin Fields and when the offense is wide open he looks like a much better player than when they throw 14 screens a game after running on first and second down and this makes me lean more towards playcalling than Bryce being the issue. 

Yeah, haven't watched that game yet but I had Fields as my fantasy QB and was loving the 1st half...he was like 19/19, 200+ yards and 3 TD's. Somebody then had a lobotomy in the second half and based on your comment it must have been the coach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BrisbanePanther said:

Yeah, haven't watched that game yet but I had Fields as my fantasy QB and was loving the 1st half...he was like 19/19, 200+ yards and 3 TD's. Somebody then had a lobotomy in the second half and based on your comment it must have been the coach.

They were trying to run the clock out. At one point they were tied, had the ball on the Denver 30, ran with the running back, ran with the running back, ran with the running back… and then on fourth and 1, ran with the running back. Never put the ball in Fields hands or let him use his legs and they failed to convert. Then Denver went down and kicked a field goal to go ahead. 

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Varking said:

They were trying to run the clock out. At one point they were tied, had the ball on the Denver 30, ran with the running back, ran with the running back, ran with the running back… and then on fourth and 1, ran with the running back. Never put the ball in Fields hands or let him use his legs and they failed to convert. Then Denver went down and kicked a field goal to go ahead. 

Ok, so yep, coaching confirmed. Your point above reinforced.

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

    • You could say that-- but if we don't need a starting OT this year, why would you draft a flawed one that is not going to play? (We are coming from different underlying assumptions and perspectives--I see your argument and don't disagree with the premise) Your thinking is based on the assumption that an OT for the future is more important than immediate needs at other positions, or that we can meet other needs in later rounds even if we take the OT in round 1.  I do not think there is but 1 OT worthy of a first-round grade---they are mocked based on need and demand--if we do not have a need for a starter right now, a team at 18 may grab a T that is the 33rd best player--worth it if you have no starting T, but not if you have a starter.  So just because they are mocked around the middle of the first it does not mean that the players are good values--teams get desperate.  QBs are a great example.  Simpson may be worth it in round 1 for the Cardinals, but not the Jets, because they have Geno Smith.  Sure, they will need a QB by next year, but taking Simpson is a reach. I do not see our need, with 2 starters (Walker and Moton) and another possibly returning by the end of the season enough to justify ranking OT over positions like Safety, Will LB--I do not think we replaced A Shawn Robinson (We gonna put a NT out there?  Wharton (280lbs)?  So do we reach in round 1 for a player who may not play much or do we get a Will LB that can cover?  A deep free safety?  A quality center? A playmaking TE?  A DT to replace Robinson?  A wide receiver to balance the secondary?  Long term, if the right player was there, you would be right.  Short term, OT is a luxury at this point, in my view.  
    • Put Huey P Newton on the helmet. With his AK. 
    • We arent switching. Evero is 3-4 to the core. Given how 3-4 has been a noticeable characteristic of top defenses recently and we have drafted and signed players fir it  I dont know why anyone would think that's a good idea 
×
×
  • Create New...