Jump to content

Trestman And Hester.


doveboss26
 Share

Recommended Posts

Maybe I'm a year or two off, but I believe once Trestman hit Chicago, Hester's role in the offense disappeared.

We simply can't have that here if Trestman comes along.

Hester isn't a great receiver but he can do some very nice things that will really open things up if you keep it simple for him. Crossers, curls, posts, flags, streaks. That's it. I don't want a guy like him trying to sit in zones and and be smart on the field. I need him to be fast and be our true any moment striker.

I want Trestman like a good bit of people, but not if he can't use Hester.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Gonna pin playoff wins on the OC when their defense was as bad as ours?

You're smarter than that.

edit: the would be OC here.

They had 30th and 31st ranked scoring defenses while he was there.....that is actually worse than ours.

I'm just saying. One of the most overrated and deceitful stats in football (most are) is the QB rating, right along with most of the other stats. The only QB stat that really matters is the TD to INT ratio and even that is a deceiving ratio.

How was the offense ranked?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm just saying. One of the most overrated and deceitful stats in football (most are) is the QB rating, right along with most of the other stats. The only QB stat that really matters is the TD to INT ratio and even that is a deceiving ratio.

How was the offense ranked?

Again, Mccown has a 13/1 INT ratio under Trestman. He's had a top 3 offense four times in ten years. Their offense was #2 in the NFL the year Cutler got hurt. Basically what I'm saying is that Cutler is turnover prone, bonehead garbage that doesn't listen to coaching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, Mccown has a 13/1 INT ratio under Trestman. He's had a top 3 offense four times in ten years. Their offense was #2 in the NFL the year Cutler got hurt. Basically what I'm saying is that Cutler is turnover prone, bonehead garbage that doesn't listen to coaching.

In other words bro...we aren't lacking in the QB department. We are lacking in the RUN department.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Turning Josh McCown into a guy that goes 13/1 with a 100+ QBR didn't do it for you?

those stats are good, no doubt. but from my eye test his offenses just didn't move me. could be i didn't give it a long enough look. but i don't remember going at any point 'man that was creative'. he had 2 big WRs and an excellent RB...he did take shots down the field...i'll give him that tho...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He substitutes a short passing game for bulk rushing attempts. This is ideal for a less than ideal run blocking OL. Forte had 102 catches for 808 yards this year.....

It gets very easy to read on defense after a while bro. VERY easy. You don't want your RB to have that many receptions and the run game to sag bro.

That is why the Cowboys are in the playoffs. They stopped trying to be a passing team.

Where did his offense rank man?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It gets very easy to read on defense after a while bro. VERY easy. You don't want your RB to have that many receptions and the run game to sag bro.

That is why the Cowboys are in the playoffs. They stopped trying to be a passing team.

Where did his offense rank man?

What have the Cowboys won? They'd already be bounced if not for the refs giving them the game.

I bet you want Kyle Shanahan. Where did his offense rank? I'll give you a hint. It's worse than Trestmans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What have the Cowboys won? They'd already be bounced if not for the refs giving them the game.

I bet you want Kyle Shanahan. Where did his offense rank? I'll give you a hint. It's worse than Trestmans.

You would be betting wrong. I don't mind bringing in Trestman so long as we have a strong defense. Will need one with that one dimensional forward pass all day garbage.

You can't win in this league without running the ball. People need to stop with the football porn and wanting to jump rope without rope...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You would be betting wrong. I don't mind bringing in Trestman so long as we have a strong defense. Will need one with that one dimensional forward pass all day garbage.

You can't win in this league without running the ball. People need to stop with the football porn and wanting to jump rope without rope...

2011 NYG - 32nd ranked running game

2010 GB - 24th ranked running game

2012 BALT - 11th ranked running game

2008 PIT - 23rd ranked running game

What people really need to stop thinking is that there is only one magical solution to winning a super bowl. All teams of all different varieties have won super bowls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

2011 NYG - 32nd ranked running game - 411 attempts 1427yds on ground, 17 TD's (most important stat)

2010 GB - 24th ranked running game - 421 attempts, 1606 yds, 11 TD's

2012 BALT - 11th ranked running game - 11th is VERY good, 444 attempts, 1901 yds, 17 TD's

2008 PIT - 23rd ranked running game - 460 attempts, 1690yds, 16 TD's

What people really need to stop thinking is that there is only one magical solution to winning a super bowl. All teams of all different varieties have won super bowls.

No I think you are overrating the rankings there sir. You HAVE to run the ball. He ran the ball year one and they did better. By year two he was all pass and the team didn't fare as well. Sure it was defense too, but every team you posted as SB winners ran the ball quite a bit and had good defenses.

Trestman ran his first year and stopped his second year...why? They were second in year one and 23rd in year two...coincidence???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2011 NYG - 32nd ranked running game

2010 GB - 24th ranked running game

2012 BALT - 11th ranked running game

2008 PIT - 23rd ranked running game

What people really need to stop thinking is that there is only one magical solution to winning a super bowl. All teams of all different varieties have won super bowls.

You have to run the ball. You just do. It keeps defenses honest. If you don't they will start sitting on routes like they did whenever koetter abandoned the run and that leads to Matt throwing pick sixes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have to run the ball. You just do. It keeps defenses honest. If you don't they will start sitting on routes like they did whenever koetter abandoned the run and that leads to Matt throwing pick sixes.

Did you see the follow-up I wrote above. All opf those teams ran the heck out of the ball. They just didn't have a lot of yards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm a year or two off, but I believe once Trestman hit Chicago, Hester's role in the offense disappeared.

We simply can't have that here if Trestman comes along.

Hester isn't a great receiver but he can do some very nice things that will really open things up if you keep it simple for him. Crossers, curls, posts, flags, streaks. That's it. I don't want a guy like him trying to sit in zones and and be smart on the field. I need him to be fast and be our true any moment striker.

I want Trestman like a good bit of people, but not if he can't use Hester.

I don't see any reason why Hester shouldn't be out there for kick returns (and punts of course) 100 percent of the time. That said, if Trestman was the considered the right man to run the offense then I'll be damned if a receiver of Hester's caliber is going to be a reason for making or breaking the deal.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 No I think you are overrating the rankings there sir. You HAVE to run the ball. He ran the ball year one and they did better. By year two he was all pass and the team didn't fare as well. Sure it was defense too, but every team you posted as SB winners ran the ball quite a bit and had good defenses.

Trestman ran his first year and stopped his second year...why? They were second in year one and 23rd in year two...coincidence???

Who would've thought that the common variable between all super bowl winners was having a good overall team.
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.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...