GB vs PHI : Post Game Recap

[HighCalebR]

1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

 Looks like it is supposed to go off left tackle.  Walker is supposed to down block, Myers is supposed to cut down traffic, and he flat out whiffs and ends up hitting no one.  

Jenkins gets outside to seal the edge and the outside TE blocks down to create the crease.  The interior TE is to get a hat on the guy and move him down some.  That block was awful as well, and I can't tell who it was.  

RG is to fire out and find some hat to hit, which he does, that allows Tom to try to get a hat on the second level.

Walker ends up looking around after the play is done as if he really didn't know what was going on.

I don't know know what you are trying to defend here.  The clip is about Myers awful attempt at a block.  And it's poor.  You pointed out Walker, and he was poor as well.

That was a microcosm of our short yardage run stuff for most of the game.  We didn't execute well at all in those situations.  It'll get better with more reps.  

For this one play, yah, Myers was bad.  You added Walker as being bad.  Totally agree.  I'll add that interior TE.  And what sunk the play was the failure at the point of attack by Walker and the TE.  Maybe the Myers miss wouldn't have killed the play had Walker and the TE done their jobs better.

So, here's the "thing" to me.  We ran at a LT and a TE while on the goalline.  The TE had to block what, a DE or DL?  Probably a DE, but that was a large guy.  We motioned another TE to that side.  Didn't threaten them with any kind of pass set to spread out the field a little.  

We left a lot of points on the board because of poor red zone execution and maybe a lack of creativity in the red zone on short yardage plays.  This play kind of encompasses all of that.

Yep thats what i said brother. The play isnt up for a debate it IS off tackle.

Its supposed to be but 93 takes himself out of the play i explained that part very clearly.

RG doesnt matter just cut the guy he does. Anything to the right of center isnt important.

Yep again thats what i said.

Walker is also supposwd to be digging out 93 but he took himself out of the play so he should attack nearest body but he gets turned around instead.

It doesnt encompass our short yardage stuff we had other solidly blocked stuff. This is 1 play.

Im saying myers rep isnt that awful theres nobody in the gap hes supposed to clear and then he continues moving forward. idk what youre trying to say here? Just reiterating what i said? This is about as bad as the time you thought myers did something wrong by chasing his guy out of a screen even though he didnt touch him

 

Edited September 10 by HighCalebR

[vegas492]

5 minutes ago, HighCalebR said:

Yep thats what i said brother. The play isnt up for a debate it IS off tackle.

Its supposed to be but 93 takes himself out of the play i explained that part very clearly.

RG doesnt matter just cut the guy he does. Anything to the right of center isnt important.

Yep again thats what i said.

Walker is also supposwd to be digging out 93 but he took himself out of the play so he should attack nearest body but he gets turned around instead.

It doesnt encompass our short yardage stuff we had other solidly blocked stuff. This is 1 play.

Im saying myers rep isnt that awful theres nobody in the gap hes supposed to clear and then he continues moving forward. idk what youre trying to say here? Just reiterating what i said? This is about as bad as the time you thought myers did something wrong by chasing his guy out of a screen even though he didnt touch him

 

No, you get my post wrong.  I am agreeing with you and expanding upon it.

It is a bad play from Myers, there is no denying that, or making any excuses for him.  But that didn't sink the play.  Asking an in-line TE to down block a DE/DL is probably not a great plan design.  Covering him up with another TE doesn't help the spacing any.

I'm not sure who was more responsible for the poor play, the in line TE or Walker, the coach that wanted that play run, or the QB who allowed it to be run.  I guess I can give a pass to the TE, because it was the play call that set him up to fail.  Walker?  Can't really excuse that, and with him looking around after the play, it just scream out that he didn't know what he was supposed to do.

But that was kind of my point, that I probably didn't make well.  Our short yardage stuff and red zone offense was just poor.  Spacing, blocking, creativity.....etc it was all lacking.  Talking heads will point out how awful Myers was on the play.  And they are right, he was bad on that play, but he didn't kill the play.

[Leader]

Agree.

 

[TransientTexan]

20 hours ago, PACKRULE said:

Don't be so quick to get all upset bro, was just noting this we seem overly upset in the defense so yes that is based on expectations...........didn't single you our so take your straw and put it back it's all good i could really care less just a note. Not all notes need a response with a straw man straw girl or straw non binary included:). Have a nice day. 

 

If you get upset by people properly identifying straw-man arguments, all you have to do is stop using that sort of rhetoric.

You can say “we seem overly upset in the defense” without pretending people aren’t satisfied unless it’s top-2. 

 

[TransientTexan]

On 9/9/2024 at 9:44 AM, HighCalebR said:

You guys always want people to be offended and ****. Nobody is going to be offended by your words.

False. I am not “wanting” anything. Just calling it like I see it. Most people that feel the need to weigh in on someone else’s characterization of a performance don’t exaggerate that someone’s positions unless they are heated.  

On 9/9/2024 at 9:44 AM, HighCalebR said:

Hopping week to week "worth it" "not worth it" is reactionary

What does that even mean? Reaction is reaction. 🤷‍♂️ who cares? 

Not every characterization has to be a season-long (or career-long) projection from as zoomed out a view as possible. Then there’d be little reason for anyone to make new posts every week. Not everything needs to explicitly come tied with a bunch of qualifiers as if this is some legal statement in a court-of-law. 

It is entirely fair to offer a more incremental analysis from game to game or even from play to play. 

 

 

[HighCalebR]

8 minutes ago, TransientTexan said:

False. I am not “wanting” anything. Just calling it like I see it. Most people that feel the need to weigh in on someone else’s characterization of a performance don’t exaggerate that someone’s positions unless they are heated.  

What does that even mean? Reaction is reaction. 🤷‍♂️ who cares? 

Not every characterization has to be a season-long (or career-long) projection from as zoomed out a view as possible. Then there’d be little reason for anyone to make new posts every week. Not everything needs to explicitly come tied with a bunch of qualifiers as if this is some legal statement in a court-of-law. 

It is entirely fair to offer a more incremental analysis from game to game or even from play to play. 

 

 

So whats that mean of the person that proffers a characterization? are you offended by a football game? 

I like measured takes. thats why i started posting here, we've lost a TON of those voices. Yeah thats fair, if thats how you want to post i wont engage anymore, carry on with the whiplash takes brother, wont hear from me again.

Edited September 10 by HighCalebR

[HighCalebR]

40 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

No, you get my post wrong.  I am agreeing with you and expanding upon it.

It is a bad play from Myers, there is no denying that, or making any excuses for him.  But that didn't sink the play.  Asking an in-line TE to down block a DE/DL is probably not a great plan design.  Covering him up with another TE doesn't help the spacing any.

I'm not sure who was more responsible for the poor play, the in line TE or Walker, the coach that wanted that play run, or the QB who allowed it to be run.  I guess I can give a pass to the TE, because it was the play call that set him up to fail.  Walker?  Can't really excuse that, and with him looking around after the play, it just scream out that he didn't know what he was supposed to do.

But that was kind of my point, that I probably didn't make well.  Our short yardage stuff and red zone offense was just poor.  Spacing, blocking, creativity.....etc it was all lacking.  Talking heads will point out how awful Myers was on the play.  And they are right, he was bad on that play, but he didn't kill the play.

If I grade that for Myers he's getting a neutral grade. That play by Myers doesnt really bother me at all. Nothing on the right side of center matters to the play.

[TransientTexan]

2 minutes ago, HighCalebR said:

So whats that mean of the person that proffers a characterization? are you offended by a football game? 

This makes no sense at all. I didn’t say all characterizations tend to be from an offended person. Just ones that involve straw-manning.

3 minutes ago, HighCalebR said:

I like measured takes. thats why i started posting here. Yeah thats fair, if thats how you want to post i wont engage anymore, carry on with the whiplash takes brother

I’ve made plenty of measured long-view takes throughout my time on this board. But that doesn’t mean there’s never room for short-term descriptions, or that anything short-term is inaccurate over the term that it intends to characterize. But engage with whatever you want. 

[vegas492]

31 minutes ago, HighCalebR said:

If I grade that for Myers he's getting a neutral grade. That play by Myers doesnt really bother me at all. Nothing on the right side of center matters to the play.

I'd give it a minus, because he hit nothing but grass.  Either way, you are right in my book.  He didn't "lose" that play.  It was lost by the in line TE and LT.

Even if Myers cuts his guy, and let's just say he even rolls to the LB and occupies him, that play is still dead at the point of attack.

That how you see it? (forget the plus minus stuff, that is all semantics)

[Leader]

Looks like Quay whiffed to me.

 

Edited September 10 by Leader

[GHARMON9]

32 minutes ago, Leader said:

Looks like Quay whiffed to me.

 

He did. if he shoots that straight up that's a TFL.

[Mazrimiv]

DE snap counts vs PHI.  Have to say, I expected the usage rate for Van Ness to be higher.  At this point in his career, is Smith really a 70% snap count kind of player?

• Smith: 54
• Gary: 49
• Enagbare: 30
• Van Ness: 19

[vegas492]

3 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

DE snap counts vs PHI.  Have to say, I expected the usage rate for Van Ness to be higher.  At this point in his career, is Smith really a 70% snap count kind of player?

• Smith: 54
• Gary: 49
• Enagbare: 30
• Van Ness: 19

Against a QB who can really run and hurt you?  Probably so.

Against a pocket QB?  Not so sure on that one.

It'll be interesting to see how those snaps are after a few weeks and a few different kind of QB's.  

I kind of expect us to run a similar game plan against the Colts.  Which is too bad, as I really want to see what we can do when we can just rush to the stop in the pocket.

[HighCalebR]

28 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said:

DE snap counts vs PHI.  Have to say, I expected the usage rate for Van Ness to be higher.  At this point in his career, is Smith really a 70% snap count kind of player?

• Smith: 54
• Gary: 49
• Enagbare: 30
• Van Ness: 19

Hmmm looks like enagbare is DE3. Shocking.

[MrBobGray]

1 hour ago, Leader said:

Looks like Quay whiffed to me.

 

Depends on how we're defining it.  I think it's hard to call this a whiff only because I don't think Quay even gets as far as attempting a tackle.  Herman's not wrong that Quay is trying to take on a block from 69 and 69 slips, but I think we're all in agreement that the real question he's not asking is why Quay is even trying to take on a block in the first place?  69 isn't actually even trying to block him; he slips when Brooks extends to sheds his block and his feet just slide away as he tries to take the impact.  Quay's already in the gap when he goes to 'take on a block' from an OL who doesn't even reach his way.

Quay needed to just shoot this low and clear hands if the OL tried to down block on him as he entered the gap.  Granted he couldn't have known the C and the LG would get hung up so long on their double teams, but I just don't love the instinct to make priority one hitting a blocker.

That being said, I will say I kinda hate this alignment and this wasn't a good look for Clark either obviously.  Looks like the double team caught him completely off guard which is weird.  And alignment-wise, I don't know the down and distance, but this seems like they're lined up roughly like 7-3-4-7 with the LBers aligned in the same gaps as the DTs.  I mean maybe it's just me but I don't super love having no DL even adjacent to either A-gap in a situation where the run is still on the table.  The C and LG both kinda screw up their jobs on this play and it doesn't even matter because there's just so much empty space in the middle of the line.

Edited September 10 by MrBobGray