gdt8: mesomorphic peckers versus KC kief's 2019 exclusive (MNF): bashaud's return to gorgeos green bay 2019 + "the incomparable" tony brown recoups his starting position PART UN

[Arthur Penske]

2 minutes ago, Sasquatch said:

Wrong.  The running back muffed the handoff.

Didn’t Lancaster knock it out while Shady was holding it out there and recover it? Certainly wasn’t a muffed handoff because he had it for awhile.

 

 

[Sasquatch]

1 minute ago, cannondale said:

I don't know. Other teams play zone that's much tighter than the 5-8 yards we are allowing. Sending Martinez isn't the answer. Sending corners is all you got left and that's a risky proposition. Pettine is hanging his hat on Smithx2 and teams are on to it. I don't know how you switch that up. There isn't anyone on the inside to send. 

Maybe so, and it worked I guess.  But if that’s what we’ve got personnel wise, then other, better teams later in the season have the gold-plated blueprint on how to screw this defense into next season.

[Sasquatch]

Just now, Arthur Penske said:

Didn’t Lancaster knock it out while Shady was holding it out there and recover it? Certainly wasn’t a muffed handoff because he had it for awhile.

 

 

The replay I saw was a clear muffed handoff, but if it was Lancaster’s hand getting in there somehow, good on him.

[waterfish_21]

1 minute ago, Sasquatch said:

One little mistake?  You want to count the number of mistakes we made on D tonight - several that lead to scores?  Look, I’m of the opinion a different strategy would’ve worked better - you’re not.  Cool.  Guess we’ll never know.

This is exactly what I'm talking about.  Speed kills, zone cover 2 helps you cover up for more mistakes.  If we play that man scheme with heavy blitzes and we make 1 mistake, it's a TD.  At Least in zone we have safeties and other guys that can help cover up.  

Your right, we will never know if it would have worked better or not, but we did win this game, which is what mattered most.  

[Sasquatch]

Just now, waterfish_21 said:

This is exactly what I'm talking about.  Speed kills, zone cover 2 helps you cover up for more mistakes.  If we play that man scheme with heavy blitzes and we make 1 mistake, it's a TD.  At Least in zone we have safeties and other guys that can help cover up.  

Your right, we will never know if it would have worked better or not, but we did win this game, which is what mattered most.  

You’re talking in hypotheticals.  “If”.  Well guess what, our scheme tonight lead to several of those huge plays you’re trying to convince me would happen with a different scheme.  See what you’re doing here?

[Toddfather]

Damn looks like I missed a good one. I was EMS in our ER and we were slammed, so I only saw the last drive before I clocked out... That being said... 7-1 into a bye... This has been amazing so far, and watching the highlights I even liked the attempt at the flea flicker... We keep adding more and more, and this teams loves each other. This is a special group right now. Great to see.

[waterfish_21]

3 minutes ago, Sasquatch said:

You’re talking in hypotheticals.  “If”.  Well guess what, our scheme tonight lead to several of those huge plays you’re trying to convince me would happen with a different scheme.  See what you’re doing here?

I don't know what you mean by this comment.  This entire forum is based on "IF's" and "my opinions" vs what actually happened.

[Sasquatch]

7 minutes ago, Arthur Penske said:

Didn’t Lancaster knock it out while Shady was holding it out there and recover it? Certainly wasn’t a muffed handoff because he had it for awhile.

 

 

I rewatched the play, you are correct.  I was wrong.  Good on Lancaster.  Great play by him.

[Sasquatch]

Just now, waterfish_21 said:

I don't know what you mean by this comment.  This entire forum is based on "IF's" and "my opinions" vs what actually happened.

What?  Your saying you fear that man coverage would lead to the “big play”. I said, “guess what, the big plays happened tonight in the damn soft coverage we’re arguing about!”  I honestly can’t comprehend how you’re not seeing the hypothetical situation you’ve laid out here?

[Sasquatch]

11 minutes ago, Toddfather said:

Damn looks like I missed a good one. I was EMS in our ER and we were slammed, so I only saw the last drive before I clocked out... That being said... 7-1 into a bye... This has been amazing so far, and watching the highlights I even liked the attempt at the flea flicker... We keep adding more and more, and this teams loves each other. This is a special group right now. Great to see.

We don’t have a bye next week - we still have two more games before our bye in week 11.

[waterfish_21]

Just now, Sasquatch said:

What?  Your saying you fear that man coverage would lead to the “big play”. I said, “guess what, the big plays happened tonight in the damn soft coverage we’re arguing about!”  I honestly can’t comprehend how you’re not seeing the hypothetical situation you’ve laid out here?

What i'm saying is when we played Man vs the Cowboys we got burned on huge plays.  These WR's are better than Dallas' in my opinion.  Also I've seen this KC torch man coverage with big plays all year.  My entire argument is we allow less big plays with this coverage/defensive scheme.  Also watching the Packers all 22's, Kevin King falls down quite a bit vs quick WRs'.  The Chiefs have quite a bit of these guys.  We match him up with the bigger WR(Golladay, Sutton, Jeffery, Robinson, he covered Waller a lot in the redzone).  This was going to be a rough game for him.  Jaire jumps routes a lot, sometimes it works, sometimes Amari Cooper goes for 200 yards 1v1 on Jaire.  

What I'm saying is the zone cover 2 makes up for this mismatch the Chiefs had vs us.  Who knows if all heavy blitzing and m2m with single safety would of done.  Its just my opinion on a forum based on what I've seen all year from both teams is that KC puts 40 on us if we don't play deep.  Am I allowed to have an opinion on a forum?

[PossibleCabbage]

9 minutes ago, Sasquatch said:

We don’t have a bye next week - we still have two more games before our bye in week 11.

West Coast home game next week though.

[Sasquatch]

1 minute ago, waterfish_21 said:

What i'm saying is when we played Man vs the Cowboys we got burned on huge plays.  These WR's are better than Dallas' in my opinion.  Also I've seen this KC torch man coverage with big plays all year.  My entire argument is we allow less big plays with this coverage/defensive scheme.  Also watching the Packers all 22's, Kevin King falls down quite a bit vs quick WRs'.  The Chiefs have quite a bit of these guys.  We match him up with the bigger WR(Golladay, Sutton, Jeffery, Robinson, he covered Waller a lot in the redzone).  This was going to be a rough game for him.  Jaire jumps routes a lot, sometimes it works, sometimes Amari Cooper goes for 200 yards 1v1 on Jaire.  

What I'm saying is the zone cover 2 makes up for this mismatch the Chiefs had vs us.  Who knows if all heavy blitzing and m2m with single safety would of done.  Its just my opinion on a forum based on what I've seen all year from both teams is that KC puts 40 on us if we don't play deep.  Am I allowed to have an opinion on a forum?

To be frank, you’re the one arguing my opinion, LOL.  You said it yourself, and I quote “who knows if heavy blitzing and m2m with single safety would’ve worked?”  That’s my point.  We don’t know and we can’t be certain, but I’m arguing it might have considering Moore had a career night.

Fact: soft coverage lead to scoring drives and big, scoring plays, with their speed guys running wild with time and space.

Unknown:  would m2m with more blitzing have disrupted Moore enough to make mistakes,,or, would it have lead to even more big plays than we saw tonight?

[Sasquatch]

1 minute ago, PossibleCabbage said:

West Coast home game next week though.

This is true!  Will Rivers have a career passing day against us?  Stay tuned.

[waterfish_21]

8 minutes ago, Sasquatch said:

To be frank, you’re the one arguing my opinion, LOL.  You said it yourself, and I quote “who knows if heavy blitzing and m2m with single safety would’ve worked?”  That’s my point.  We don’t know and we can’t be certain, but I’m arguing it might have considering Moore had a career night.

Fact: soft coverage lead to scoring drives and big, scoring plays, with their speed guys running wild with time and space.

Unknown:  would m2m with more blitzing have disrupted Moore enough to make mistakes,,or, would it have lead to even more big plays than we saw tonight?

Maybe it was a misunderstanding from my point.  If 66% completion 267 yards and 2 passing TD's is a career day for Matt Moore with these weapons I'm ok with it.  If he went for 400 and 4-5 TD's its a different issue.  Also Matt Moore has had more impressive passing games statistically than today, not sure it it was a true career day.