Looney ... The Morning After: Philadelphia

[Just Passin' By]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

Bull ****ing shit, the entire purpose of the flea flicker is to; 1) give the QB some room to launch on a variation on a 7 step drop, and 2) launch downfield to WRs on burners, on the hope that either the WRs superior speed or a hitch from the DB reading run creates separation.


List for me the number of times in the HISTORY of the NFL where a flea flicker EVER resulted in the QB back up in the pocket, finding the checkdown and throwing into the line. Feel free to go back as far as you want.

I've been watching for 20 years, and seen my share of NFL Films, and had never seen it before Cassel.

If the CB doesn't bite on the fake, you don't throw the deep ball. That's smart on the part of the QB, and it happens. Brady's been in that situation numerous times in recent years. Your "throwing into the line" argument is the fault of the offensive lineman, who left the D-lineman disengaged.

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by Just Passin' By

If the CB doesn't bite on the fake, you don't throw the deep ball. That's smart on the part of the QB, and it happens. Brady's been in that situation numerous times in recent years. Your "throwing into the line" argument is the fault of the offensive lineman, who left the D-lineman disengaged.

So I understand your assertion as clearly as possible, you are saying that Brady has not only run numerous flea flickers in recent years, but checked down on numerous flea flickers in recent years.

Since my best guess estimate is that teams average 1-2 flea flicker attempts a year, is it your position that NE runs an inordinate number of them in 'recent years' or that the general sense of 'numerous' and 'recent' are liberalized for the purposes of this discussion.

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

So I understand your assertion as clearly as possible, you are saying that Brady has not only run numerous flea flickers in recent years, but checked down on numerous flea flickers in recent years.

Since my best guess estimate is that teams average 1-2 flea flicker attempts a year, is it your position that NE runs an inordinate number of them in 'recent years' or that the general sense of 'numerous' and 'recent' are liberalized for the purposes of this discussion.

you know what who gives a ****? the wr was covered, which if you would have watched the chiefs replay you would know. probably wouldnt make a difference though.

you are wrong. cassel made some bad plays but that wasnt one of them unless you blame him for getting the ball batted down. He made the right read.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

you know what who gives a ****? the wr was covered, which if you would have watched the chiefs replay you would know. probably wouldnt make a difference though.

you are wrong. cassel made some bad plays but that wasnt one of them unless you blame him for getting the ball batted down. He made the right read.
Posted via Mobile Device

Give it up, Sauto; the man ain't The Man.

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by ROR

Give it up, Sauto; the man ain't The Man.

much has been said fairly and i havent said shit. but when its not fair or just totally off base ( such as here) ill say something.

cassel gets bashed for everything im surprised that he hasnt been blamed for page not showing up
Posted via Mobile Device

[Baby Lee]

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

you know what who gives a ****? the wr was covered, which if you would have watched the chiefs replay you would know. probably wouldnt make a difference though.

you are wrong. cassel made some bad plays but that wasnt one of them unless you blame him for getting the ball batted down. He made the right read.
Posted via Mobile Device

The central concern is this starting to look like, even if Weiss forced the issue and sent every single eligible receiver on a go route, Cassel would try to check down to to an O-lineman.

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by Baby Lee

The central concern is this starting to look like, even if Weiss forced the issue and sent every single eligible receiver on a go route, Cassel would try to check down to to an O-lineman.

well if they were all double covered what would be the right play? (and i know its not possible but we arent really being realistic in this scenario)
Posted via Mobile Device

[Coogs]

Originally Posted by JASONSAUTO

well if they were all double covered what would be the right play? (and i know its not possible but we arent really being realistic in this scenario)
Posted via Mobile Device

Serious question Jason... Do you really like what you see in Cassel?

[SAUTO]

Originally Posted by Coogs

Serious question Jason... Do you really like what you see in Cassel?

not all the time. i see some things he does right. i see some he does wrong.

im not naive enough to blame it all on him. in this case chambers was covered. he made the right read, nothing to complain about unless you blame him for the dlineman that albert was blocking knocking it down.

helll i said the other day that he needs to shit or go. not play good enough to save his job.

step up when the bullets fly or die and be gone after this season.
Posted via Mobile Device