Quote:
Originally Posted by tk13
I think that absolutely proves my point. But to each his own. We allowed 2 first downs, they only attempted one pass. They did not move the chains running the football like they did against the Chargers. It's not even close. The Chargers allowed more first downs on the ground in those first two drives you posted than we did in the entire game today.
We stopped the run on 1st and 2nd down, got them in 3rd down situations and then we got them off the field. I don't know what on earth you're expecting. If you're expecting 85 Bears style play, then yes, that's a disappointment. For us to have been "more successful" stopping the run we literally would've had to hold them to about 40 yards rushing for the game under your scenario.
|
I love how the narrative of what actually happened in the game changes after the game is over. Go back and read the first half of the game thread. This is what you'll see:
"Holy shit, I can't believe the Raiders are this ****ing stupid"
"Cable is the best D-coordinator we've ever had"
"The Raiders keep stopping themselves with bad play calling"
Were we better against the run today? Hell yes. But let's not start sucking each other's dicks. This is a bad run defense, and we "stopped" it about as well as the Patriots stopped Marshall Faulk in the Super Bowl. When your coaches don't come out to establish what you do well, it's not the other team that has stopped that part from working, it's those coaches.
The truly amazing thing is that Russell was so bad, and so inaccurate, that he wasn't even able to hit swing and flare passes. Had he even done that, you probably would have (but not definitely) seen a lot more running, as the lanes were wide open and it would have extended the drives.