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!

     

Anyone else notice....


Zod

Recommended Posts

It's a good observation....Had he been gone 100% it would have been close. Then again it is the Kraken, the guy is clearly motivated and had a great season last year. Bell won't see a d-end that good every week. 

 

 

Also who knows -during some reps, the o-lineman are subconsciously going 75% because they know the d-line can't go 100%. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Defense can never hit the QB in practice. Hardy was going 75%

 

And Bell knows this as well.  Was he going 82.3%?  Maybe 90% and throttled down to 64%.    Maybe he was at 110% and that was the best he could do.....   Hmm now that I think about it Hardy must have been going at least 77% at the start, then probably.... cruised to 59% and idle..... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if this was a live game with both men going at it 100% and bell dropped his shoulders and stopped moving his feet the exact same way, he wouldn't have been able to push hardy out of play. without that push, hardy would have turned him and been on newton before newton finished his reads.

 

even if newton runs in the gap created, it's still a blown play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if this was a live game with both men going at it 100% and bell dropped his shoulders and stopped moving his feet the exact same way, he wouldn't have been able to push hardy out of play. without that push, hardy would have turned him and been on newton before newton finished his reads.

 

even if newton runs in the gap created, it's still a blown play.

 

This...

 

Btw guys, it really doesn't matter if Bell was going 100% or not, or that Hardy wasn't either. He didn't show the fundamentals there. Like I sad earlier, every athlete has a meh play occasionally, so I'm not worried too much when he's playing out of his normal position, and I'm certainly not bashing him.

 

But if you want to see what he should have done that play, please refer to Campbell, who is going through the play textbook.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Bell knows this as well.  Was he going 82.3%?  Maybe 90% and throttled down to 64%.    Maybe he was at 110% and that was the best he could do.....   Hmm now that I think about it Hardy must have been going at least 77% at the start, then probably.... cruised to 59% and idle..... 

You done?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It's not impossible to go from worst to first.  We kept Evero because anyone in there right mind knew our defense was destroyed by injuries, not the scheme.  Evero has been given a plethora of talent between free agency and the draft, not to mention getting DB back. I fully expect our defense to be very good.  I have no reason to think Jones would say something like that unless he truly felt like that.   
    • We would’ve played Florida and lost in the 1st instead of the 3rd round.  Montreal would have been the 8 seed.
    • I can't get behind a purely subjective re-draft as a method of defining "top-10 QB" status. That invites bias based on vibes/hypotheticals and can ignore actual on-field performance. You and others have said that Bryce has to be a top-10 QB to justify the pick. That's a high bar, which I'm not against, but we need a clear, consistent way to measure it. When I bring up metrics that Bryce has registered in the top-10 in like BTT%, P2S ratio, catchable deep ball rate, etc... they're waved off as either irrelevant or the expected baseline performance. Meanwhile, volume stats like passing yards or win-loss records, both of which depend heavily on roster talent, health, and coaching, are treated as definitive. That's where the inconsistency kicks in. If no performance metric ever counts in his favor and the answer is always going to be "he should be doing that," then we're not evaluating him... we're just holding him to a curve he can't win against. If this is really about performance standards, then let's define them. But if it's just about confirming prior takes based on height and weight, then let's call it what is it and stop pretending that this is a football analysis discussion.
×
×
  • Create New...