PDA

View Full Version : Deficiencies in the Game Plan


NewChief
09-19-2005, 07:02 AM
I hate to gripe on victory Monday, but I've got a few observations.

1) LJ needed to carry the ball more.
2) I didn't like our situational playcalling. We got ourselves into some bad yardage situations due to it. Also, I know that we use the run to set up the pass, but I felt like we stuck to the run too long, which then forced us to pass too much in the 4th quarter.
3) I'm torn on the defensive scheme. On one hand, we won and did a fairly good job of containing Moss. We also got the stop when it counted most. On the other hand, Collins seemed to wilt under pressure every time we put together a decent pass ruch. Only problem? We hardly ever did. I think that Gun played really conservatively with his blitzing schemes. I think he was really scared of getting burnt deep. It worked, but I would have liked to see us get more pressure on Collins as it seemed to really affect him when we did.

In general, I felt that we played the entire game too conservatively on offense and defense. While we won, I think we should have been able to beat the Raiders much worse had we been more aggressive in the air and in our blitzing.

jspchief
09-19-2005, 07:08 AM
I agree that we played very conservatively. I think that's why we were settling for FGs late in the game. I don't really have a problem with a conservative approach in that situation.

Divisional game on the road. We were in control for a very large portion of the game.

the Talking Can
09-19-2005, 07:08 AM
when Roaf and Sampson and Warfield get back we can more aggressive both sides of the ball....

our DL can't generate pressure, so we have to blitz...but Gun correctly decided that wouldn't be a good risk/reward with McCleon on Moss....it wasn't sexy, but it was the right call...unless or until Sims comes back and Warfield comes back and Bell raises his level of play we'll have to play a little bend don't break against certain offenses

NewChief
09-19-2005, 07:10 AM
when Roaf and Sampson and Warfield get back we can more aggressive both sides of the ball....

our DL can't generate pressure, so we have to blitz...but Gun correctly decided that wouldn't be a good risk/reward with McCleon on Moss....it wasn't sexy, but it was the right call...unless or until Sims comes back and Warfield comes back and Bell raises his level of play we'll have to play a little bend don't break against certain offenses


Yeah, I shouldn't be griping. Like I said, I was torn on my feelings. On one hand, it's awesome to see us grind out a road win against a division rival. We won through smart play, bend don't break defense and possession football. On the other hand, it was way too close for my tastes.

JimNasium
09-19-2005, 07:12 AM
1) LJ needed to carry the ball more.

In a tight game, against a run stuffing D, I would rather see Priest get the bulk of the carries.

the Talking Can
09-19-2005, 07:12 AM
Yeah, I shouldn't be griping. Like I said, I was torn on my feelings. On one hand, it's awesome to see us grind out a road win against a division rival. We won through smart play, bend don't break defense and possession football. On the other hand, it was way too close for my tastes.

trust me, I was screaming for Gun to kill Collins...but in the calm of hindsight I think he had the right plan....and don't forget we stuffed the run even without Sims...

ChiTown
09-19-2005, 07:12 AM
I agree that we played very conservatively. I think that's why we were settling for FGs late in the game. I don't really have a problem with a conservative approach in that situation.

Divisional game on the road. We were in control for a very large portion of the game.

Yeah, the play calling was frustrating, but I think our goal was to chew clock. The raiders barely had the ball in the 2nd half.

KUDOS to the D for stiffening up when they needed to. Besides the lucky bomb to Moss and a lack of qb pressure, I thought they looked pretty good.

Chief Henry
09-19-2005, 07:28 AM
[QUOTE=ChiTown]Yeah, the play calling was frustrating, but I think our goal was to chew clock. The raiders barely had the ball in the 2nd half.

QUOTE]


Ball control in the 2nd half was terrific. Did I hear correctly that we kept the ball for 9 minutes in one of those drives???? If thats accurate, then Trent Green and the make shift offensive line might have played their best game, if you consider all the changes plugged into last nights game on the off line.

Props to Tynes for stepping up big time last night. Those field goals
were huge.

oldandslow
09-19-2005, 07:28 AM
In a tight game, against a run stuffing D, I would rather see Priest get the bulk of the carries.


Exactly.

Hoover
09-19-2005, 07:29 AM
The reverse top Dante was effin dumb.