Jump to content

BDL Discussion Thread 2022


Jlash

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Whicker said:

Okay. We disagree.

This is not realistic football, nor is it fantasy football. It's BDL. It has its own quirks and nuances, and I do not believe it actually represents realisitic football nor does it need to. 

While I agree that BDL is its own animal, I do think we strive for a semblance of realism.  

I think the only disagreement is where exactly that realism line lies, which is a totally valid thing to disagree on.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ragnarok said:

While I agree that BDL is its own animal, I do think we strive for a semblance of realism.  

I think the only disagreement is where exactly that realism line lies, which is a totally valid thing to disagree on.

 Yeah I mean I am also in agreements that BDL is its own beast.  But I also feel like what makes it what it is the semblance of realism that we hold

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Ragnarok said:

While I agree that BDL is its own animal, I do think we strive for a semblance of realism.  

I think the only disagreement is where exactly that realism line lies, which is a totally valid thing to disagree on.

 

3 minutes ago, wwhickok said:

 Yeah I mean I am also in agreements that BDL is its own beast.  But I also feel like what makes it what it is the semblance of realism that we hold


I concur 

 

dance dancing GIF by Neurads

Edited by RTTRUTH
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Scoundrel said:

Dion Dawkins playing guard. I played Kyle Pitts in the slot a lot. Would Sherman not be a big physical corner you’d want to match up there? There’s examples on all of your rosters in all of your gameplans I can go through and point out including mine.

Probably. So a lot of it will come down to how we sell it in our game plans. And again, there will always be someone who doesn’t agree.

It’s like high school English class all over again, because I plan to BS my way through everything

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When it comes to Jeremy Chinn, I'll move him back to Safety if that's an issue.

I think the semblance of realism is necessary.  However, I also think, to give a little to what Whicker is saying, there needs to be some flexibility as well. The bottom line is we have to be able to work with the players we have on our roster. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RTTRUTH said:

Probably. So a lot of it will come down to how we sell it in our game plans. And again, there will always be someone who doesn’t agree.

It’s like high school English class all over again, because I plan to BS my way through everything

I’m going to check your spacing!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, wwhickok said:

When it comes to Jeremy Chinn, I'll move him back to Safety if that's an issue.

I think the semblance of realism is necessary.  However, I also think, to give a little to what Whicker is saying, there needs to be some flexibility as well. The bottom line is we have to be able to work with the players we have on our roster. 

 

No one said it’s an issue. What I am saying is if that passes then so should what Whicker is saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Scoundrel said:

No one said it’s an issue. What I am saying is if that passes then so should what Whicker is saying.

I don't entirely disagree. I get what Whicker is saying and I don't think I totally disagree with him.

It comes down to where we set the line. While I do think a certain amount of realism is important so is a certain amount of flexibility. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Scoundrel said:

If Jeremy Chinn is playing 3 down linebacker a number one corner can play nickel in this league.

 

13 minutes ago, wwhickok said:

When it comes to Jeremy Chinn, I'll move him back to Safety if that's an issue.

I think the semblance of realism is necessary.  However, I also think, to give a little to what Whicker is saying, there needs to be some flexibility as well. The bottom line is we have to be able to work with the players we have on our roster. 

 

 

13 minutes ago, Scoundrel said:

No one said it’s an issue. What I am saying is if that passes then so should what Whicker is saying.

Didn't Chinn play a lot of LBer as a rookie?

I do think the line between WLB and SS has blurred a lot in the current NFL.  He would fit in either imo.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me I guess it comes down to this. Using Richard Sherman as an example if the player he is matching up against regardless of where he is being used on the field makes sense and then I suppose I'm not fully against the idea even if it means Sherman is used inside. I think that is a good mixture of flexibility and realism is it realistic that Sherman would be put on this individual. Is it realistic that he would be used inside maybe not but if hes been used inside on somebody he would actually be matched up against maybe that is where we find the flexibility

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...