Originally Posted by Hammock Parties:
By the way, plays are kind of designed to come out when the QB reaches the end of his drop, whether it's 3-step, 5-step or 7-step....like WTF man :-)...you accuse ME of not knowing ball?
Joe Thuney is the LT. DJ Humphries isn't coming to save this team.
Yeah, if they're designed that way, why does Mahomes hold the ball longer than over half the other QBs in the league?
The coaches want DJ out there for a reason. But I'm sure you know better than they do. [Reply]
I'd like to know what dude saw, he watched a dude knocking off rust in the altitude of Denver while having Kingsley as his LG, all things considered he performed pretty well. [Reply]
Originally Posted by htismaqe:
Yeah, if they're designed that way, why does Mahomes hold the ball longer than over half the other QBs in the league?
The coaches want DJ out there for a reason. But I'm sure you know better than they do.
Yea pretty obvious why they want him out there, even if you like quick passing, rhythm, on time and all that...Mahomes holding the ball and breaking the pocket is where the big game changing plays come from. [Reply]
Its interesting -- I've said all season that I don't think Andy 'saves the good plays' rather I think he's a guy who won't spam the ones that work in the regular season.
But I'm not seeing that against Houston and Pitt.
Those all look like spamming a couple of very similar concepts and they all look to be largely built around a smash sort of concept. Slot fades, corner/flats -- stuff like that. And the reason Andy doesn't spam that stuff is that he doesn't want to give coaches the tape to diagnose/attack them. I mean if I'm watching those weeks and I'm a DC, I'm coming out with a heavy Cover 3 gameplan because about none of what I'm seeing there should work against that.
But think about those bunch sets we like that we LOVE running the slot crosser from -- we can't run that with the short drops and that stuff MURDERS Cover 3.
With Thuney, I think we give teams about 60% as much to worry about. From a schematic standpoint, it's not working with one hand behind your back, but maybe with one hand in a cast or something.
Now execution takes priority over scheme. If you just can't execute the whole playbook, so be it.
I'm just not convinced that's the case. Or not convinced it's any more likely to be the case with Humphries at LT than Thuney. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Its interesting -- I've said all season that I don't think Andy 'saves the good plays' rather I think he's a guy who won't spam the ones that work in the regular season.
But I'm not seeing that against Houston and Pitt.
Those all look like spamming a couple of very similar concepts and they all look to be largely built around a smash sort of concept. Slot fades, corner/flats -- stuff like that. And the reason Andy doesn't spam that stuff is that he doesn't want to give coaches the tape to diagnose/attack them.
But think about those bunch sets we like that we LOVE running the slot crosser from -- we can't run that with the short drops.
With Thuney, I think we give teams about 60% as much to worry about. From a schematic standpoint, it's not working with one hand behind your back, but maybe with one hand in a cast or something.
Now execution takes priority over scheme. If you just can't execute the whole playbook, so be it.
I'm just not convinced that's the case. Or not convinced it's any more likely to be the case with Humphries at LT than Thuney.
It's pretty accurate, after Hopkins got here, they ran the 3 receivers to 1 side and Hopkins by himself inside the 10...Hopkins got wide open both times and they stopped running that play. [Reply]
Originally Posted by tyreekthefreak:
I'd love to see Humphries at LT AND PLAY GOOD! But wishing ain't gonna make it happen....no matter how much hyperbole you put into it!!!!
Okay.
I mean I've discussed stats, traits, technique and scheme in this thread. I've conceded that the risk is real and I may not even be willing to take it.
Your response is "He got manhandled"
When it's pointed out that hey - there are clips in this very thread showing that he had a great deal many very good reps and on the bad reps there have been suggestions made as to why that may have been communications problems.
Your response is "I know what I saw"
And when your intransigence is pointed it its...."well that's just hyperbole..."
I mean keep on keepin' on, brotha. You're covering yourself in glory here.
The rest of us will just go on talking about actual football around you. Because you clearly know all you need to know and as such, I probably wouldn't put any more effort into the conversation were I you... [Reply]
Originally Posted by tyreekthefreak:
I'd love to see Humphries at LT AND PLAY GOOD! But wishing ain't gonna make it happen....no matter how much hyperbole you put into it!!!!
The flip side of that is that fretting that he will play poorly doesn’t mean that will… no matter how much hyperbole you put into it!!! [Reply]
Originally Posted by Raiderhater:
The flip side of that is that fretting that he will play poorly doesn’t mean that will… no matter how much hyperbole you put into it!!!
I guess I need to go find my hyperbole.
I mean I'm fairly certain I've said that he was solid but unspectacular and struggled more in the second half than then first. I've said that Thuney has done yeoman's work in salvaging the position of late while the coaching staff did well to work around his shortcomings.
I know I didn't say stuff like "Humphries got manhandled" at any point.
Maybe I just don't know the word as well as I thought I did.
Because I see plenty of hyperbole in this thread...but it ain't from my side of this discussion... [Reply]