Jump to content

Expert Poster

Forum Members
  • Posts

    970
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Expert Poster

  1. Some lazy researching on their part. Those were Pitts' receiving numbers from before this game... he has more yards on the year than the Miami TE does now.
  2. Definitely. I just wouldn't read too much into any stat lines given the competition.
  3. They were going up against bench and G-league players from the Heat, but it's still good that they were able to get some time on the floor as a full starting unit and go into the season with positive vibes. Bring on the Mavs.
  4. Well, you're certainly a miserable poster and there's never any excitement from reading your posts, so there's that.
  5. Yep, or they get so psyched out that they basically squib it and we start around the 35.
  6. Bogi and Huerter have both played extensively in the preseason and should be fine. Everything I've heard suggests Trae will be good for the opener as well. Obviously Okongwu is out for awhile. The only ones I'd be somewhat concerned about are Capela and Hunter. I think Capela will be fine long term, but we need him early on with Okongwu out. And Hunter's knee issues seem like they may be a constant thing; hope I'm wrong, as he could be an all-star level player if he can remain healthy.
  7. Watched him closely against FSU and immediately thought he would be great under Pees. I'm guessing he'll be gone by the time we pick, but would love to be able to grab him.
  8. It's funny because 30 is pretty old for a prototypical RB, but he obviously doesn't have the same tread on his tires that guys who've been getting 200+ carries per season for 8-9 years would have. And his conditioning seems to be top notch, so it may be 2-3 years before he starts to decline. Nonetheless, his age will be used against him somewhat in contract negotiations, which could be good for a cash-strapped team like us.
  9. If he plays all 17 games, he should crack 1000 yards. Nevermind rookies--most of the TEs who have done this at any point in their careers are in the HOF or will be. Some people's expectations preseason were just out of whack, expecting him to put up peak Julio or Calvin Johnson numbers as a rookie. Makes more sense to compare rookie numbers. Julio (2011): 54 rec, 959 yards, 8 TD, 73.8 ypg in 13 games Calvin (2007): 48 rec, 756 yards, 4 TD, 50.4 ypg in 15 games Pitts is on pace for 82 rec, 1047 yards, 3 TD, 61.6 ypg. If his receptions pick up some, it's conceivable he could have as many receptions as they had combined in their rookie years.
  10. I think CP will continue to return kicks. Only a fraction of them are actually returnable, so it's a fairly small addition to his overall workload/injury risk. I also get the sense that he really likes returning.
  11. Only thing I don't like about Arthur Smith is that beard
  12. Where's that one poster who insisted he wouldn't have much of an impact this year? BLM or something.
  13. Maybe. They might have just not been as high on Fields and Jones as the Bears and Patriots were. If you know your overall talent level isn't there yet and you have a QB on a big contract already that will cut into any potential QB's rookie contract, it can make sense to defer on the QB pick. I agree on Blank, but that's not AS's fault.
  14. Eh, it's pretty rare for a coach or owner in the NFL to come out and say they expect to be bad. Even if privately they know that to be the case, they're going to insist they expect to win from the jump.
  15. I think it's fine to rely on the defense when the situation calls for it. I'm not asking for AS to go for it on 4th down deep in his own territory in that situation. If the offense can't generate a first down running a semi-normal sequence of plays, so be it: you punt and rely on the defense. What doesn't make a lot of sense is basically telegraphing to the opposing team that we're just going to run the ball and punt it back to them to give their offense another chance. You have them on the ropes and they need a stop to have any chance, so it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to hand them that chance on a silver platter.
  16. Still pretty questionable for McVay, but at least he's working with the Rams defense and not the Falcons. And the Seahawks needed a TD rather than a FG.
  17. Got abused by the Cardinals last week, though.
  18. Rams just made the same run-run-pass mistake we did Sunday, though at least for them, the Seahawks need a TD instead of a FG.
  19. https://www.si.com/nba/2021/10/06/trae-young-hawks-leader-daily-cover Great article on Trae's maturation and future. I don't always agree with Nate's rotations, but the more I hear about how much he's pushing Trae to be the best version of himself, the more I think he's the right coach for this young team.
  20. Been an issue with this franchise for about 55 years.
  21. This is a really good point. You can run safe pass plays without taking your foot off the gas, and often be much more effective at milking the clock in the process.
  22. I just hope he develops a killer mindset, because we blew two straight 3-score leads under Mike Smith in the 2012 playoffs with this same ball control mentality, and blew something like six such games under Quinn. If AS is going to be successful here, he's got to call plays to put teams away when he has them on the ropes.
  23. But frankly, that's just not sensible. You can still believe in your DC without abandoning an offensive possession. WFT had 2 timeouts and the 2-minute warning when we were running the ball, so it's not like they were going to be crunched for time when they got it back. Every team in the NFL is well-versed in a 2-minute offense. There was NO WAY we were going to be able to avoid punting it to them without getting a first down, so we had the following options: 1) try for the 1st down and if you don't get it, rely on your defense to get a stop; 2) don't try for the 1st down and rely on your defense to get a stop. Choosing #2 is strategically insane.
  24. Eh, you can throw an interception any time you pass the ball, so I don't think that's a good rationale. If we ran it every play the entire game and got beat 48-0, and Arthur Smith said in the postgame that he didn't throw it because he didn't want to risk an INT, none of us would think that's sound reasoning. Same goes for this. Willingly giving the ball back to them in a 2-point game because you didn't want to risk an interception is coaching scared, and not a high percentage move. We shouldn't conflate process with results. Sunday's late game playcalling wasn't bad because of the results, but because of the process. The results just punctuate how poor the process was. If WFT had fumbled at the 1 yard line at the end and we'd survived, it still would have been bad decision-making to not try to end the game with the offense on the field. I think people are so conditioned to hearing the phrase "rely on your defense at the end of the game" that they don't realize that doesn't mean you willfully stop trying to rely on your offense. If you have the ball, you should be doing everything in your power to ensure they guide your team to victory. Call plays that put them in situations to succeed, not to go 3-and-out and give the ball to the other team. That's exactly what WFT wanted us to do, and we played right into their hands.
  25. OK, so it sounds like your issue is just that we don't live in a pure meritocracy. Sure, it would be great if we did and things like networking and familial connections didn't matter, but they do. It has no bearing on what kind of head coach Arthur Smith is or will be.
×
×
  • Create New...