PDA

View Full Version : Things we should NEVER see on offense and things we will see constantly on defense


donkhater
08-28-2005, 02:19 PM
On offense:

We should NEVER see T-Rich run the football. He is a good 4-5 years past his ability to make any moves what so ever with the rock in his hand. He is a blocker and catch and fall-down receiver. The sooner Saunders realizes this, the sooner KC will stop wasting plays by giving him the ball.

We should never see Trent hold onto the ball so damn much. Sure, he pulls it out of his butt sometimes, but more often that not he gets an untimely sack (See last season). Really, this is the only part of his game I absolutely detest.

On defense:

With the blitz happy scheme Gunther has implemented get ready to see three basic plays over and over until the KC defense shows they can stop it.

The draw
The screen pass
The quick slant route

The last time Gunther had control over this team those plays were the bane of the defense (particularly the screen pass). Hopefully he has better players to implement his defense.

J Diddy
08-28-2005, 02:22 PM
The draw-hoping the d line will stay at home enough to stop it (maybe that's why sims had less then 15 tackles last year)

The Screen-If DJ can blow it up on our offense, I think he'll be able to hang

The slant-Keep throwing it at Surtain, see what happens

Count Zarth
08-28-2005, 02:22 PM
We don't need to worry about screen. We have Kawika "The ScreenBuster" Mitchell.

jcroft
08-28-2005, 03:05 PM
Add to the list: The Bootleg

BigMeatballDave
08-28-2005, 04:53 PM
Add to the list: The BootlegI think DJ will take care of that...

Chan93lx50
08-28-2005, 05:39 PM
I am seriously going to blow my wad, when plummer runs the bootleg and DJ totally rips plummers head!

donkhater
08-29-2005, 07:10 AM
Add to the list: The Bootleg
I agree. Trent Green should NEVER run the bootleg. :)

Amnorix
08-29-2005, 07:14 AM
I seem to remember the Patriots screening you guys to hell and gone, but don't remember if that was in the heart-attack special game in 2002, when we were screening EVERYBODY to hell and gone, cuz we had no running game, or last year.

Of course, in '02 you were still stuck with G-Rob, so that's not very relevant to your defense these days.

petegz28
08-29-2005, 07:53 AM
The Draw: We have looked good against so far

The Screen: We have looked good against so fat

The Slant: As someone else said..."keep throwing at Surtain and see what happens"

TRR
08-29-2005, 08:16 AM
There was a perfect example Saturday night of how we could have used LJ and Priest in the same backfield together. Priest was lined up at halfback and TRich at FB. Priest motioned out as a flanker and TRich took a step back and carried the ball for no gain. Now wouldn't that be the perfect time to line up LJ at FB, and let him get a touch or two?

That call made no sense to me. Neither of TRich's carries did. It should be Priest and LJ and nobody else. If you have to line up either at FB, and move around to get LJ touches, so be it.

Bowser
08-29-2005, 08:21 AM
There was a perfect example Saturday night of how we could have used LJ and Priest in the same backfield together. Priest was lined up at halfback and TRich at FB. Priest motioned out as a flanker and TRich took a step back and carried the ball for no gain. Now wouldn't that be the perfect time to line up LJ at FB, and let him get a touch or two?

That call made no sense to me. Neither of TRich's carries did. It should be Priest and LJ and nobody else. If you have to line up either at FB, and move around to get LJ touches, so be it.

Patience, grasshoppa.....

Amnorix
08-29-2005, 08:23 AM
There was a perfect example Saturday night of how we could have used LJ and Priest in the same backfield together. Priest was lined up at halfback and TRich at FB. Priest motioned out as a flanker and TRich took a step back and carried the ball for no gain. Now wouldn't that be the perfect time to line up LJ at FB, and let him get a touch or two?

That call made no sense to me. Neither of TRich's carries did. It should be Priest and LJ and nobody else. If you have to line up either at FB, and move around to get LJ touches, so be it.

Repeat after me -- "it's the preseason".

TRR
08-29-2005, 08:31 AM
Repeat after me -- "it's the preseason".

Repear after me, your a Pats fan, I could give a sh*t less about your opinions.

NewChief
08-29-2005, 08:37 AM
There was a perfect example Saturday night of how we could have used LJ and Priest in the same backfield together. Priest was lined up at halfback and TRich at FB. Priest motioned out as a flanker and TRich took a step back and carried the ball for no gain. Now wouldn't that be the perfect time to line up LJ at FB, and let him get a touch or two?

That call made no sense to me. Neither of TRich's carries did. It should be Priest and LJ and nobody else. If you have to line up either at FB, and move around to get LJ touches, so be it.

Hah. We were just talking about that play last night. I imagine they just wanted to establish that formation/package. I seriously doubt that during the real season Trich will be getting the ball on that play.

Amnorix
08-29-2005, 09:32 AM
Repear after me, your a Pats fan, I could give a sh*t less about your opinions.

It has nothing to do with being a fan of Team X or Team Y. It has everything to do with having some basic understanding of how football's preseason works.

Why don't you also suggest giving Priest Holmes 30 carries a game in the preseason too, while you're at it...

Bowser
08-29-2005, 09:39 AM
Hah. We were just talking about that play last night. I imagine they just wanted to establish that formation/package. I seriously doubt that during the real season Trich will be getting the ball on that play.

I predict T-Rich will have about ten carries and ten receptions this year, maybe a TD or two.