Pure Football
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


takeitdown last won the day on June 10 2012

takeitdown had the most liked content!


About takeitdown

  • Rank
    Starting Lineup

Contact Methods

  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

9,965 profile views
  1. FO is pretty good for the run breakdown...they get into line yards vs RB yards, etc. For pass pro, they just look at sack rate. So, if your QB gets rid of the ball quickly, that shows as being good pass protection. If your offense has to adjust to never throwing the deep ball or double moves because the OL can't hold up...that shows as good pass protection. The run stats sort of fit with what you see...a team that gets good runs but has difficulty in 3rd and 1. I don't think the run blocking needs a ton of help. But pass blocking needs some...I wish FO would come up with a better pass blocking metric...it's never been as good as the run one. It's not like we need a whole new OL. We need a good RG. Then Schweitzer becomes good OG depth. That won't make us a top line, but it should make us fine, and good enough to not be a liability.
  2. If we took a WR early, it would be to be a 2, making Sanu a 3, which is what his position should be. We have 2 NFL caliber receivers, and no NFL caliber receiving TEs...and everyone thinks "hey, we're fine." Our receivers beyond our 1 are some of the weakest in the league among good teams. It wouldn't be at all strange to think we have a lot of young developing talent on D that will only get better, while we have a lot of aging vets on O, so we'll get old quickly. A FA OG, and a draft of OG, TE, WR in the first 3 rounds would make as much sense as most other drafts here. We'd be shoring up an area (passing game) by attacking both the interior line and the quick passing game. This would likely be far more effective in terms of point translation (with those 4 players, we probably score 6 more points per game) than taking D players (wouldn't expect to decrease points by 6 above and beyond what would happen with development. The simple reality is we have no developing talent on offense. We should have been taking WRs in the 3rd and 4th consistently to be developed. We haven't done that. Now it's a bit late for that...we're going to have to have guys who can contribute now.
  3. I know man. I like the dude. He vaguely reminds me of Anquan. I know he doesn't quite have the size. Just think we need a tall speed guy. Right now Julio is the only person you have to worry about getting behind you. I wouldn't cry with this draft and offseason, because I like any offseason that shores up lines and gets playmakers. I'd just lean toward WR and TE earlier than you. I think our D has more young emerging playmakers than our O, and we need a couple to keep the train rolling. Actually it is just a couple...a legit TE, and a legit WR. Very interested to see what Samuels runs. He's a very out of the ordinary prospect.
  4. I actually like taking one player like that. I was positive we were going to use a TE/FB hybrid last year after we let Dimarco go and Sark was coming in. Thought we might use Hooper as an H back and get a true receiving TE. I of course was wrong, but hopefully we get that player this year. I like all these guys, I just think we need a legit TE, making Hooper the 2...and we have a lack of talent at receiver...particularly speedy talent, after Julio and certainly after Sanu. I wanted TE and WR in the 3rd and 4th last year so we had a chance to develop them. I like all your guys, like I said, but would probably take a true WR or TE in the 3rd at latest to combine w your TE/FB hybrid in the 4th. We lose out on LB but still get the 1st 2 rounds with D talent, and get some young guns for our offense.
  5. Well, I think we need a legit TE and WR more than people think...as we have no 1 TE, and no 3 or 4 WR to create matchup problems. That said, You cover OG which is a huge need, and keep adding playmakers to the D, so I can't be that upset.
  6. I know you don't do them all the time. But going for more 4th downs than normal is good. Applying pressure with both your defense and offense is good. It's all situational, but coaches go the passive route too often on those plays. Failing to run when you can be up 2 scores with 2 minutes left isn't really a play that ever makes sense.
  7. You should be aggressive almost always. Quinn wasn't aggressive enough this year. The time you aren't aggressive is when you've won the game if you just keep running. So when there's 4 minutes and a FG essentially wins the game...run. But yeah, going for it on 4th and 1, going deep, sending blitzes...those are good all the time. Make the other team make great plays to beat you.
  8. Pederson has impressed me a lot the last several weeks. The Eagles are helped my having just an overall good team, with solid lines, and good backs, receivers, safeties, etc. But he's made smart playcalls, and remained aggressive. I will agree the defenses took it rough today, but it was also because the offenses A) didn't have their lines collapsing and B ) ran smart plays to make the defense play all levels of the field. It's a lot harder to play D when you can't key in on what's coming.
  9. Well, what I saw today was 2 good teams, and far better offensive scheming than we have. Been impressed with the Eagles since Foles came in. The coaches made great adjustments to have him do what he does, and Alshon catches everything...he's Larry Fitzgeralding it out there. But good coaching/scheming and good lines were what I saw stand out today.
  10. Definitely need to improve conditioning. But you don't play 91 snaps on defense if you get off the field on 3rd downs. That's the bigger issue.
  11. Yeah being able to get Wynn and Payne would be great, though impossible. We'll have to take at least one of those positions in FA. But Wynn, Payne, TE, WR would pretty much reset this squad.
  12. DE was planned for with Takk. We could always use another, because you can't have too many pass rushers, but DE they covered. The big misses were expecting Schweitzer and Hooper just to "step up" without having real competition. We left two holes on offense and filled them with hope. Those have to be fixed this year. WR was the 3rd offensive need last year (tall fast guy) and that remains. A guy to punish teams deep when they roll coverage to Julio. The others were filled with part timers or early round draft (Poe, Riley.) Except for OG, TE I don't really have a problem with how they handled last year. But we're always going to be needing DL and LB and WR/TE....you need to take one of those nearly every year.
  13. Have no problem with taking a FA OG and then taking a 3rd round OG. Need DT, TE, WR also, but between FA and 1st 2 rounds should be able to cover those.
  14. That's more the current bastardization of the zone scheme. It's brilliance is in not having to choose players who are great pass blockers and great run blockers. It's like coming up with a scheme that lets you use a WR who is big or fast instead of needing both. Blockers used to either be good run blockers (big, plodding, power blockers) or good pass blockers (mobile, agile, mirroring) or sometimes both. To get both, you had to use a 1st round pick. To get one or the other, you could get them in the 3rd to 5th round. So the zone scheme is designed to take agile, athletic blockers (naturally good pass blockers) and show them a way to use that athleticism to overcome their lack of heft and power in the run game. Hence the chop/cut, on the move dynamics of run blocking. Now, you can take a 3rd round OG/OT who is agile and he can be good at pass blocking AND run blocking. If you take a guy who starts out as a poor pass blocker, you defeat the whole beauty of that system. You get rid of the marriage it created. Now I won't argue that that's what Gibbs started to do in hubris, draft trash 6th round players and coach them up on run blocking when they'd never be good pass blockers. But that's not the power of that system.
  15. I agree with a lot of your thinking. The problem is, pass rushing DTs don't care that you have a run system that doesn't require great guards. They'll abuse those guards and utilize the shortest distance to destroying your passing game. We don't need dominant all world guards. But we do need 2 medium to good guards, who are naturally better at pass protecting. The zone blocking scheme doesn't make guards better at pass protecting, just at run blocking. Also think Guard is increasing becoming one of the more important positions (but I've thought this for the last 10 years, so no real change). I'd say the biggest change (other than OC) to our offense was OG play, followed by TE play (and then all the random mistakes). One FA OG and one legitimate young talent to groom seems critical with a pocket QB.