|
02-03-2005, 08:45 AM | #2 |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2000
Casino cash: $10004900
|
Any idea who Priest is negotiating with? How much cap room does he have?
|
Posts: 1,735
|
02-03-2005, 08:46 AM | #3 | |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Thigpen's America
Casino cash: $10004900
|
Quote:
Who's with me? |
|
Posts: 25,680
|
02-03-2005, 08:48 AM | #4 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Sep 2000
Casino cash: $10004900
|
Quote:
|
|
Posts: 1,735
|
02-03-2005, 08:52 AM | #5 |
21st Century Schizoid Fan
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Gates of Delirium
Casino cash: $2574950
|
It's a bit more nuanced than that. In 2003 we got more points from Dante and, I believe, the defense. Dante fer sure. In 2004, the offense failed to score, or even get a first down, at critical times. I think we slipped a bit on O last year.
The D, of course, just plain stinks and has for quite awhile. In 2003 we surrendered fewer than 20 points in a game 7 times. In 2004 we did that twice. |
Posts: 69,134
|
02-03-2005, 09:05 AM | #6 | |
Supporter
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Memphis/Miss
Casino cash: $10006883
|
Quote:
I, too, believe the O is on the verge of slipping just a bit. Therefore, it is urgent the they get the D right this coming year. |
|
Posts: 2,152
|
02-03-2005, 09:07 AM | #7 |
Beyond the Rapids
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Langley, VA
Casino cash: $-370000
|
The D was getting more turnovers the first half of last year and things just seemed to be rolling our way.
|
Posts: 80,659
|
02-03-2005, 07:11 PM | #8 | |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Thigpen's America
Casino cash: $10004900
|
Quote:
True, but that doesn't account for the 100 more points given up. |
|
Posts: 25,680
|
02-03-2005, 08:11 PM | #9 | |
21st Century Schizoid Fan
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Gates of Delirium
Casino cash: $2574950
|
Quote:
The D the first half of 2003 forced a lot of turnovers, which covered up for its propensity to surrender yards in chunks. Plus, the O and special teams were more efficient, which led to more wins. In 2004, our D didn't force turnovers, it continued to give up huge chunks of yards and our O and ST weren't able to paper over those D mistakes. I think those 100 points were mostly attributable to turnovers, or lack thereof. My gut also tells me that the more-efficient O in 2003 gave the D a few more leads to play with, which helped it. How many times in 2004 did we lament blown scoring opps which would have given us two-score leads and perhaps taken a bit of pressure off the D? |
|
Posts: 69,134
|
|
|