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!

     

Your Bend


stirs

Recommended Posts

When you cheer a team, would you rather they be an awesome Defense or Offense.

I remember the Bears in the 80's and the 46 defense. I could not wait to see them destroy opponents. I was much more fired up watching them stop the other guys than to watch a team score 50 points.

I love a strong ferocious defense way more than offense.

Modern day, Not necesarily today. Saints offense? or Ravens Defense?

You?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I enjoy watching where the great plays are being made. I can watch anything once but I rarely re-watch anything thats crap unless Im intentionally looking for laughs. . . like when Jimmeh does his main move, the "point at the line and mumble some poo to the refs about checking that speck of random nothingness in the grass right after you just made a horribly bad play".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Big play teams are fun to watch. 2008 panthers had a great mix of both sides making plays.

The patriots near undefeated season had a spectacular offense and the ravens 1 st Super Bowl D was the tits.

I like teams that get that swagger about them and just know going in that they are gonna bring the hurt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't watch an anemic offense. At times I can watch a bad defense as long as the offense is capable of winning a shootout, but a bad offense is so brutal to watch.

 

Now I would prefer a team that is balanced, fast paced, and makes plays on both sides of the ball, but with an offense that is able to put a lot of points on the board

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I had to choose one I would rather watch an electrifying offense than a team whose only skill is stonewalling opponents and nothing else

I understand a lot of older fans appreciate defense but nothing else, and purge the idea of a high scoring offense. They call it being "old school". I call it "retarded".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you cheer a team, would you rather they be an awesome Defense or Offense.

I remember the Bears in the 80's and the 46 defense. I could not wait to see them destroy opponents. I was much more fired up watching them stop the other guys than to watch a team score 50 points.

I love a strong ferocious defense way more than offense.

Modern day, Not necesarily today. Saints offense? or Ravens Defense?

You?

 

As an Auburn guy, I can tell you from a college football perspective that I always loved an awesome defense and was totally dedicated to that point of view.

 

Then 2010 came around and turned my world upside down.

 

In other words, I don't care... quoting the wisdom of the late, great Al Davis: "Just win, baby!"

 

I.

 

Don't.

 

Care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would rather have an awesome defense, but it can't be a lopsided difference. A great offense with a Swiss cheese defense can be fun to watch, but you will likely end up with a hole in the wall after the game. A great defense with an anemic offense is like pulling teeth.

 

For once, after all these years, I would like to see some balance on both sides of the ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

balanced and dominant with both. 

 

I'm not choosing. you can't make me. if we have one one and not the other I'll complain about the other. i expect both to be great. it's not fun for me watxhing a team that is weak on any side of the ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Balance is optimal; but I consider myself a fan of old school football lead by a ferocious defense that O's just don't want to play.

That's why I liked Fox so much; but he was WAY too dependent on the D. I really like Rivera because he doesn't completely choke off the O; but is known for having some damn good D's.

I also think offensive teams are perceived as finese. I'm more of a bull in a china shop type.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • He’s overthrown WRs numerous times deep,I don’t think his arm strength there is a problem, def seems to be and issue in the 20-30 yard range, I don’t see a lot of outbreaking routes being completed, whether that’s due to his lack of ability to drive the ball to the outside hash or our WRs, especially XL cornering at the top of there routes. regardless of his weaknesses, the question is can a team be built around him to mask them, or can he overcome those weaknesses and adapt. I know it’s beating a dead horse, but something big is missing from Bryce’s qb play that’s leading to so many sub 200 yard passing games, all signs lead to a physical trait that’s the cause of this, wether it’s arm strength or his height  
    • That was fully intentional, because something people who engage in hyperbole can't stand is to be systematically told why and how they don't have a clue. It's the prevalence of this farcical idea that everyone's opinions are valid and the more impassioned they are about them, the more valid they are. And the point of the post wasn't merely to cut the knees of the exaggerators, but to illustrate why it shouldn't seem miraculous that someone like Mayfield and Darnold could come through Charlotte and fail and then suddenly seem much more successful elsewhere, when the reality is that there's far more to being successful at that position than one's own talent. It's also why young quarterbacks like Caleb Williams and Cam Ward deserve much longer leashes to determine their long-term viability and not be written off immediately, because the circumstances surrounding them are hardly conducive to success.
    • I think at some point you top out what God gave you.  He can use leverage via his mechanics to maximize what he has and When he pays attention to it the throws are better.    IMO as a layman a lot of it is what kind of ‘headroom’ you have. The guys who are gifted don’t have to use maximum effort to get good results and stay within themselves but they have it in reserve. They can do an arm throw for substantial distance without max effort.    I think what we may be seeing with these ‘lasers’ is a throw that Bryce puts the max effort into and does his mechanics right and has his base right and it works together.    To get to the payoff here, I think his best velocity throws take dall that whereas  a naturally gifted guy doesn’t need to go full effort to get that same velocity. I have said this three or four times over the years and it never gets picked up on but the accuracy is more consistent with an easier motion and max effort can produce less predictable location. It is a baseball pitcher thing but it applies to throwing a pass too. It isn’t that you can’t make an accurate throw with full effort it is just not as reliably accurate to the same degree. Someone said something about his pro day and that is where I saw it too. He took a little extra step on the deep throws. Some call it a hitch but I don’t see it that way because I don’t see it on shorter throws. He does it trying to get distance. I saw that and just wanted no part of it at 1.1 . That is not tne characteristic of a 1.1 passer.  He should have been at best, late first  I had him second day. Of course I am no one and certainly not a pro evaluator, it is just that he was so easy to suss out. It is kind of in your face obvious.  They must have thought they could fix him. Changing a lifelong throwing motion with the footwork tied into it is not fuging easy. Anyone that had decent success with ‘their’ way and tried to change it to get more, can tell you that.     
×
×
  • Create New...