It is currently Sat Nov 25, 2017 5:32 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 3:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 9:19 am
Posts: 7983
randomsteelerfan wrote:
SP wrote:
I thought this thread was about Chef's waist size.

At any rate, the Nix/Watson combo has not been stopped all season on short yardage plays. Why not build a goal line package off it and work in some passes to the TEs to catch people off guard.


Goddammit! That made me shoot Mountain Dew out my nose! You know how painful that is?


I can't imagine shooting MD through your nasal cavity is much more painful than having to endure the taste of it while drinking it.

_________________
Frank Sinatra, Jr. 'Black Night'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jdwl7X6Jruo


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 3:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 2:46 pm
Posts: 1246
I agree. First and goal from the two is about brutality. Line up jumbo with nix and Watson. I run 4 times if needed too. Send the message you’re not gonna stop us from scoring.

_________________
Three's a charm. #StanleyCup
-- Pittsburgh Penguins (@penguins) June 12, 2017


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 3:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 8900
it's still yggy wrote:
I agree. First and goal from the two is about brutality. Line up jumbo with nix and Watson. I run 4 times if needed too. Send the message you’re not gonna stop us from scoring.


And sometimes it's just about setting up the defense. NE runs plenty in that situation, and no doubt it contributes to a lot of easy TD passes Brady gets because the defense has to respect the run.

Empty set on 1st and Goal from the 2 is just mind-numbingly stupid. And I have no doubt Ben prefers shotgun/empty set....but, c'mon dude, it just isn't working. And if that isn't evidence enough, you can also go back and look at the 2-pt failures last year.

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 3:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:58 pm
Posts: 5773
Kodiak wrote:
it's still yggy wrote:
I agree. First and goal from the two is about brutality. Line up jumbo with nix and Watson. I run 4 times if needed too. Send the message you’re not gonna stop us from scoring.


And sometimes it's just about setting up the defense. NE runs plenty in that situation, and no doubt it contributes to a lot of easy TD passes Brady gets because the defense has to respect the run.

Empty set on 1st and Goal from the 2 is just mind-numbingly stupid. And I have no doubt Ben prefers shotgun/empty set....but, c'mon dude, it just isn't working. And if that isn't evidence enough, you can also go back and look at the 2-pt failures last year.

If we're talking about the series that ended in the FG right before the half, they weren't empty on 1st down. Ben was in the shotgun, Bell as the sidecar.
I agree, run it down there, but screw that blubber package. Spread the D, run to the void. Makes it much easier than slamming into a wall of fat fucks. Just saying...

_________________
"They're standing around, Butz!" - Kevin O'Shea


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 3:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 8900
Jobus Rum wrote:
I agree, run it down there, but screw that blubber package. Spread the D, run to the void. Makes it much easier than slamming into a wall of fat fucks. Just saying...


Generally, but I feel like I've seen plenty of empty shotgun sets in that situation, or similar.

And I don't like shotgun much there, period. The defense is going to recognize pass quicker out of the shotgun. The pitches and delayed handoffs in those situations they've tried this year have mostly been hot garbage.

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 4:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:58 pm
Posts: 5773
Kodiak wrote:
Jobus Rum wrote:
I agree, run it down there, but screw that blubber package. Spread the D, run to the void. Makes it much easier than slamming into a wall of fat fucks. Just saying...


Generally, but I feel like I've seen plenty of empty shotgun sets in that situation, or similar.

And I don't like shotgun much there, period. The defense is going to recognize pass quicker out of the shotgun. The pitches and delayed handoffs in those situations they've tried this year have mostly been hot garbage.

But doesn't that fall on the play caller/designer. I've seen plenty of goal line success out of shotgun and pistol formation over the recent years. I'm of the belief that teams can have good success running out of spread formations, if called and designed correctly. I think Bell, despite his lack of breakaway speed, is well suited for the spread formation...shifty and quick. Todays pro defenses are just too fast to compact everything between the hashmarks and have consistent success. Just my 2 cents...

_________________
"They're standing around, Butz!" - Kevin O'Shea


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 5:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 1:01 am
Posts: 8900
Jobus Rum wrote:
But doesn't that fall on the play caller/designer. I've seen plenty of goal line success out of shotgun and pistol formation over the recent years. I'm of the belief that teams can have good success running out of spread formations, if called and designed correctly. I think Bell, despite his lack of breakaway speed, is well suited for the spread formation...shifty and quick. Todays pro defenses are just too fast to compact everything between the hashmarks and have consistent success. Just my 2 cents...


I feel like if the QB is under center, then the defense has to respect the run until he finishes his 3-5 step drop. Otherwise, Ben gets it in the shotgun and maybe does a half-ass PA, but it gives the defense more time to drop into the passing lanes because it's a quicker read for the defense.

_________________
------------------------------------------------------


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 8:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:58 pm
Posts: 5773
Kodiak wrote:
Jobus Rum wrote:
But doesn't that fall on the play caller/designer. I've seen plenty of goal line success out of shotgun and pistol formation over the recent years. I'm of the belief that teams can have good success running out of spread formations, if called and designed correctly. I think Bell, despite his lack of breakaway speed, is well suited for the spread formation...shifty and quick. Todays pro defenses are just too fast to compact everything between the hashmarks and have consistent success. Just my 2 cents...


I feel like if the QB is under center, then the defense has to respect the run until he finishes his 3-5 step drop. Otherwise, Ben gets it in the shotgun and maybe does a half-ass PA, but it gives the defense more time to drop into the passing lanes because it's a quicker read for the defense.

See, I think just the opposite. I think the QB in the gun with a RB gives so many more options. The D still has to honor the run threat and PA. I just think it’s easier to run out of spread formations. You bring in Hubbard at TE, Nix at FB, plus one or two other TEs, the defense is going to counter with an extra D lineman or two, moves LB inside and brings the safeties up. Congestion between the tackles, and now you have limited pass options. Now, if you insist on putting Ben under center, then give me two or three WR, along with Bell in the backfield and that could work. But “Jumbo” packages are just lousy, lazy football in this day and age.

_________________
"They're standing around, Butz!" - Kevin O'Shea


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Tue Oct 17, 2017 9:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 08, 2014 11:33 pm
Posts: 13897
Jobus Rum wrote:
Kodiak wrote:
Jobus Rum wrote:
But doesn't that fall on the play caller/designer. I've seen plenty of goal line success out of shotgun and pistol formation over the recent years. I'm of the belief that teams can have good success running out of spread formations, if called and designed correctly. I think Bell, despite his lack of breakaway speed, is well suited for the spread formation...shifty and quick. Todays pro defenses are just too fast to compact everything between the hashmarks and have consistent success. Just my 2 cents...


I feel like if the QB is under center, then the defense has to respect the run until he finishes his 3-5 step drop. Otherwise, Ben gets it in the shotgun and maybe does a half-ass PA, but it gives the defense more time to drop into the passing lanes because it's a quicker read for the defense.

See, I think just the opposite. I think the QB in the gun with a RB gives so many more options. The D still has to honor the run threat and PA. I just think it’s easier to run out of spread formations. You bring in Hubbard at TE, Nix at FB, plus one or two other TEs, the defense is going to counter with an extra D lineman or two, moves LB inside and brings the safeties up. Congestion between the tackles, and now you have limited pass options. Now, if you insist on putting Ben under center, then give me two or three WR, along with Bell in the backfield and that could work. But “Jumbo” packages are just lousy, lazy football in this day and age.

I couldn't agree more.

_________________
Whatever it takes.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: 72 inches
PostPosted: Wed Oct 18, 2017 12:07 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2014 7:56 pm
Posts: 797
Still Lit wrote:
randomsteelerfan wrote:
SP wrote:
I thought this thread was about Chef's waist size.

At any rate, the Nix/Watson combo has not been stopped all season on short yardage plays. Why not build a goal line package off it and work in some passes to the TEs to catch people off guard.


Goddammit! That made me shoot Mountain Dew out my nose! You know how painful that is?


I can't imagine shooting MD through your nasal cavity is much more painful than having to endure the taste of it while drinking it.


Oh, come on! Everybody loves the taste of a carbonated piss-colored beverage.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: JackSplat58, Majestic-12 [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 17 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
FORUM RULES --- PRIVACY POLICY




Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group