| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
philyeagles3
Joined: 01 Nov 2007
Posts: 3555
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 2:02 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| nlesthought wrote: | | birdman0069 wrote: | | philyeagles3 wrote: | | birdman0069 wrote: | | Now you are changing your story. Earlier you said we were a power running team in previous seasons. As I said, that couldn't be further from the truth. Just because our blocking scheme changes doesn't mean our offensive philosophy changes. We are a verticle attacking offense that relies on multiple reads, getting up early and running the ball after we have a lead. That's a philosophy my friend. As I stated. Vick is a one read QB. That's where Vick is at his best. Stats don't lie and stats say Vick turns the ball over to often due to his inability to read defences properly and his lack of ball security. These are not opinions, they are facts. |
I just don't even realize how this turned out to be about Vick's progressions with routes. Just goes to show how much you guys read and stay to the topic. 
Routes are half the play, I don't know why you guys are hooked on this and I don't know why you are arguing this to me. I can't tell you how his progressions work, I don't have the playbook. I can tell you his general responsibilities in this zone blocking scheme, though.
But yet somehow this always escapes your posts and you blab on about routes and Vick being a one read QB. When thats not what Im trying to argue.
IM TALKING ABOUT PRESNAP ADJUSTMENTS WITH MUDDS ZONE BLOCKING SCHEME NOT ABOUT WR ROUTES. BELIEVE IT OR NOT BUT THE OFFENSIVE LINE IS A PART OF THE PLAYS AS WELL. |
The blocking scheme has nothing to do with how Vick performs in terms of where he goes with the ball, if he can read defenses and wether he sees the blitz or not. You started this non-sence about Vick being in a new offence when indeed that couldn't be further from the truth. Vick is the same average QB he has always been and the fact is you have access to all of his stats and still make try and make an arguement that he is, or can be, an elite QB when there is no proff, what so ever, to back that up. All this comes down to is, is Vick smart enough to ba a QB before being an athlete and the ansewer is, and always has been, NO! A tiger can't change his spots.
In terms of being a verticle offence, it is very much a multi read offence. Deep is your first read wether it be a fly route or deep post, ect.... The next read is usually an 8-10 yard out or curl. The 3rd route, depending on down and distance, is usually a seam route from the TE or the RB in the flats. There is always a progression of 3 to 4 reads and Vick rarely makes it through his progressions before tucking the ball and taking off. Vick locks in on one guy and either forces the play or takes off running. A good QB goes through his progressions and often back to his first option. Vick will never be that guy.
The bottom line is, Vick may win some games but will never win big games and will never be an elite QB in this league. Be a homer and sniff his jock or don't be a homer and see things for what they are. The truth is the truth and stats back that up. |
You said its a vertical passing game, when have you seen 8-10 yard curls in our offense? I've seen 5-7 yard hitch routes but that's on a 3 step drop. And what your describing above is the dumbest thing I've heard.  You must not know route combinations I've NEVER seen first read fly 2nd read a curl and the next read a seam route. THATS NOT A NATURAL PROGRESSION. In a 5 step drop you can't go deep, short, and back to deep or even shorter. The routes are covered up by then. Even if Tom Brady is looking deep to short (8-10 curl) back to a seam route or even a flat route he's taking a hit by then.
If by what your saying is true then we should have one of the worst offenses known to mankind. Also that doesn't say its a multi-read offense. There's no reading in what you described there. |
I was confused as well.
_________________
Meow |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Art_Vandalay
Joined: 04 Mar 2007
Posts: 20384
Location: Thornton, CO
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 4:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| BLick12 wrote: | | You know what I'm saying. It isn't relevance in the regard you stated but it is relevant in the fact that we have had as much talent as the Giants have over the last 5 years. Your claim that they draft so much better and put together better talent obviously isn't all that accurate if they haven't been significantly better than us in that time. Yes, they have won 2 SBs but they got hot/healthy at the right time, executed well and got some favorable rolls their way. They have never truly been the class of the NFC at any point during the regular season, but they have strung together two great SB runs. |
Gonna have to agree to disagree here. Winning to 2 Super Bowls in the span of 4 years indicates to me that they're clearly a better team, regardless of what happened in the regular season. The Skins swept them this year, but I wouldn't say they're on the same level. Also, they had a lot of turnover since their last Super Bowl. At the end of the year, the new players and coordinators appeared to get on the same page. I don't see why their momentum would stop this upcoming season. Please don't bring up our 4 game win streak against scrub/imploding teams at the end of the year. I'm not putting much stock into that at all.
| BLick12 wrote: | | The whole you can only draft talent to win a SB isn't accurate, what difference does it make trading for a sure thing like Jason Peters versus drafting a Michael Oher? |
I'm not against making moves in Free Agency as long as it's just to plug a hole or two. 2004 is a prime example. A strong majority of the key players were drafted and coached up. We brought in T.O and Kearse to complete it. Now we're relying almost solely on free agents. Name the last team that won a Super Bowl with nearly half of their starters being a result of trades/free agency. It's just not a good recipe for success.
| BLick12 wrote: | | And we played poorly this year there is no denying that, but there were a lot of new faces on this team (player and coaching wise), a short off season for them, and poor coaching/execution at all the wrong times. I would've liked to see Andy shown the door but I'm curious to see what this team does this off-season to improve its roster and performance next year. While I think the NFC as a whole is improved I still think the Eagles are dangerous competition, and I think that showed when nobody wanted to see us get into the playoffs last year. |
I wish I was as optimistic as you  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BLick12
Joined: 12 Mar 2007
Posts: 23289
Location: South Jeezy fo sheezy
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 5:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Art_Vandalay wrote: | | BLick12 wrote: | | You know what I'm saying. It isn't relevance in the regard you stated but it is relevant in the fact that we have had as much talent as the Giants have over the last 5 years. Your claim that they draft so much better and put together better talent obviously isn't all that accurate if they haven't been significantly better than us in that time. Yes, they have won 2 SBs but they got hot/healthy at the right time, executed well and got some favorable rolls their way. They have never truly been the class of the NFC at any point during the regular season, but they have strung together two great SB runs. |
Gonna have to agree to disagree here. Winning to 2 Super Bowls in the span of 4 years indicates to me that they're clearly a better team, regardless of what happened in the regular season. The Skins swept them this year, but I wouldn't say they're on the same level. Also, they had a lot of turnover since their last Super Bowl. At the end of the year, the new players and coordinators appeared to get on the same page. I don't see why their momentum would stop this upcoming season. Please don't bring up our 4 game win streak against scrub/imploding teams at the end of the year. I'm not putting much stock into that at all.
| BLick12 wrote: | | The whole you can only draft talent to win a SB isn't accurate, what difference does it make trading for a sure thing like Jason Peters versus drafting a Michael Oher? |
I'm not against making moves in Free Agency as long as it's just to plug a hole or two. 2004 is a prime example. A strong majority of the key players were drafted and coached up. We brought in T.O and Kearse to complete it. Now we're relying almost solely on free agents. Name the last team that won a Super Bowl with nearly half of their starters being a result of trades/free agency. It's just not a good recipe for success.
| BLick12 wrote: | | And we played poorly this year there is no denying that, but there were a lot of new faces on this team (player and coaching wise), a short off season for them, and poor coaching/execution at all the wrong times. I would've liked to see Andy shown the door but I'm curious to see what this team does this off-season to improve its roster and performance next year. While I think the NFC as a whole is improved I still think the Eagles are dangerous competition, and I think that showed when nobody wanted to see us get into the playoffs last year. |
I wish I was as optimistic as you |
This isn't the chipper young Eagles enthusiast I once knew.
I just don't think they are that much better or talented. 2 SBs in 4 years, is impressive but both times they kinda snuck into the playoffs and got their share of rolls. That is the beauty of the NFL, lots of parity and the best team doesn't necessarily always win. Good teams create good fortune, yes, that maybe true but until they start beating us and the bad teams consistently I refuse to say they are significantly better than us. You never know what to expect out of the Giants, they are horribly inconsistent... sort of like the Eagles.
_________________
| johndeere1707 wrote: |
Another Ginger QB in the AFC North.
Looking forward to the "No Soul Bowl" twice a year
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
