Fix It List
-
Aloysius said:
Elam did do a nice job blowing up the first play from scrimmage, blitzing the A gap and stopping the run play. But I'm concerned that Elam is the type of guy who's always going to struggle against pass-heavy teams like the Packers. Do you remember how bad he was against the Broncos last year?I believe on the bomb that he got burned on, that we gave them way too much time to throw. He appeared to maybe get caught up into thinking the play was underneith ... although, thats a concern in itself (safety biting).
At the training camp sessions, I was very pleased to see us bringing the heat from the corners. We also played up tighter on the receivers than what was displayed Saturday night. I didn't see as much Safety blitzing at the camps, but if we will bring a corner I'd have to assume that we'd be bringing a safety up even more.
My concern is still with the LB's ... DQ was making tackles 7 yards down field like Andra Davis.
I believe on the bomb that he got burned on, that we gave them way too much time to throw. He appeared to maybe get caught up into thinking the play was underneith ... although, thats a concern in itself (safety biting).
Could be. But as I think Bernie said Saturday night, Elam's problem is that he lacks the recovery speed to compensate for his mistakes. If he bites, our defense is going to get burned deep.
Hopefully, Rob Ryan will help him out by rushing more than three guys. And it wouldn't be such a bad idea to sub in Mike Adams on obvious passing downs.
-
Aloysius said:
Elam did do a nice job blowing up the first play from scrimmage, blitzing the A gap and stopping the run play. But I'm concerned that Elam is the type of guy who's always going to struggle against pass-heavy teams like the Packers. Do you remember how bad he was against the Broncos last year?I believe on the bomb that he got burned on, that we gave them way too much time to throw. He appeared to maybe get caught up into thinking the play was underneith ... although, thats a concern in itself (safety biting).
At the training camp sessions, I was very pleased to see us bringing the heat from the corners. We also played up tighter on the receivers than what was displayed Saturday night. I didn't see as much Safety blitzing at the camps, but if we will bring a corner I'd have to assume that we'd be bringing a safety up even more.
My concern is still with the LB's ... DQ was making tackles 7 yards down field like Andra Davis.
My concern is still with the LB's ... DQ was making tackles 7 yards down field like Andra Davis.
Is there concern about the LBs? Sure there still is. But I am not sure why you chose to single out Jackson and compare him to Davis. Jackson's line on running plays looks like this for the game (notice where the run was to as well):
3-1-GB 31 (13:33) 25-R.Grant right guard to GB 33 for 2 yards (52-D.Jackson, 98-R.Smith).
1-10-GB 33 (12:54) 25-R.Grant right tackle to GB 47 for 14 yards (26-A.Elam, 52-D.Jackson).
3-10-CLE 42 (4:48) 32-B.Jackson right tackle to CLE 37 for 5 yards (52-D.Jackson).
2-4- (15:00) 32-B.Jackson right tackle to 50 for no gain (52-D.Jackson).
Sure Jackson had two stops 5 and 14 yards up field. But he also had two stuffs in there as well. Then when you look at where the big runs were and what you saw, those runs have a lot to do with the guy at OLB on that side not sealing off the run.
-
My concern is still with the LB's ... DQ was making tackles 7 yards down field like Andra Davis.
Is there concern about the LBs? Sure there still is. But I am not sure why you chose to single out Jackson and compare him to Davis. Jackson's line on running plays looks like this for the game (notice where the run was to as well):
3-1-GB 31 (13:33) 25-R.Grant right guard to GB 33 for 2 yards (52-D.Jackson, 98-R.Smith).
1-10-GB 33 (12:54) 25-R.Grant right tackle to GB 47 for 14 yards (26-A.Elam, 52-D.Jackson).
3-10-CLE 42 (4:48) 32-B.Jackson right tackle to CLE 37 for 5 yards (52-D.Jackson).
2-4- (15:00) 32-B.Jackson right tackle to 50 for no gain (52-D.Jackson).
Sure Jackson had two stops 5 and 14 yards up field. But he also had two stuffs in there as well. Then when you look at where the big runs were and what you saw, those runs have a lot to do with the guy at OLB on that side not sealing off the run.
Masters said:
Is there concern about the LBs? Sure there still is. But I am not sure why you chose to single out Jackson and compare him to Davis. Jackson's line on running plays looks like this for the game (notice where the run was to as well):3-1-GB 31 (13:33) 25-R.Grant right guard to GB 33 for 2 yards (52-D.Jackson, 98-R.Smith).
1-10-GB 33 (12:54) 25-R.Grant right tackle to GB 47 for 14 yards (26-A.Elam, 52-D.Jackson).
3-10-CLE 42 (4:48) 32-B.Jackson right tackle to CLE 37 for 5 yards (52-D.Jackson).
2-4- (15:00) 32-B.Jackson right tackle to 50 for no gain (52-D.Jackson).
Sure Jackson had two stops 5 and 14 yards up field. But he also had two stuffs in there as well. Then when you look at where the big runs were and what you saw, those runs have a lot to do with the guy at OLB on that side not sealing off the run.
Dude, with all due respect, you put up four plays that netted 21-yards and used it in a positive light for our LB-defense. that's kind of like sayin, "Take away the INT, add a phantom TD and we scored 7-points ... add in the missed field goal and we only lost 17-10!"
Oh wait, you did say that too.
This was the best preseason game I bet you've ever watched ... the second time around.
-
Ate,
When did you start to get all hater on here?
It wasnt the prettiest game, but it's preseason who gives two shits about the final score.
Quinn moved the ball and looked good doing it.
DQ looked good, our DE's were getting washed out. Our LB's scare me when in pass coverage though..they don't seem comfortable making reads yet. Our RB's looked unimpressive. Jamal is so washed up I am suprised he is still collecting an NFL paycheck.
As far as coaching schemes go, who would want to run anything but vanilla basic offense and defence in week ONE OF PRESEASON..don't tip your cap before the actual season starts.
I would go as far as saying it's stupid to run anything but the most basic of packages.
Not a bad game, just iron out some kinks and move on.
-Lambdo
-
Masters said:
Is there concern about the LBs? Sure there still is. But I am not sure why you chose to single out Jackson and compare him to Davis. Jackson's line on running plays looks like this for the game (notice where the run was to as well):3-1-GB 31 (13:33) 25-R.Grant right guard to GB 33 for 2 yards (52-D.Jackson, 98-R.Smith).
1-10-GB 33 (12:54) 25-R.Grant right tackle to GB 47 for 14 yards (26-A.Elam, 52-D.Jackson).
3-10-CLE 42 (4:48) 32-B.Jackson right tackle to CLE 37 for 5 yards (52-D.Jackson).
2-4- (15:00) 32-B.Jackson right tackle to 50 for no gain (52-D.Jackson).
Sure Jackson had two stops 5 and 14 yards up field. But he also had two stuffs in there as well. Then when you look at where the big runs were and what you saw, those runs have a lot to do with the guy at OLB on that side not sealing off the run.
Dude, with all due respect, you put up four plays that netted 21-yards and used it in a positive light for our LB-defense. that's kind of like sayin, "Take away the INT, add a phantom TD and we scored 7-points ... add in the missed field goal and we only lost 17-10!"
Oh wait, you did say that too.
This was the best preseason game I bet you've ever watched ... the second time around.
Dude, with all due respect, you put up four plays that netted 21-yards and used it in a positive light for our LB-defense. that's kind of like sayin, "Take away the INT, add a phantom TD and we scored 7-points ... add in the missed field goal and we only lost 17-10!"
Oh wait, you did say that too.
This was the best preseason game I bet you've ever watched ... the second time around.
Read my post, think, then respond. Not in reverse order.
"Is there concern about the LBs? Sure there still is." I think that just goes against your first sentance, as well as your first snippy comment. And do you think your Ricky Bobby with the "with all do respect" line.
I have no where made the statment about taking away the int, adding a phantom TD and CLE scored 7 or 10 points.
Then, "But I am not sure why you chose to single out Jackson and compare him to Davis. Jackson's line on running plays looks like this for the game (notice where the run was to as well):". Now look at that as solely about Jackson, and where the play was run at/to. I simply questioned singling out Jackson. Twice he did get in there and stuff the run. Twice he tackled up field when the ball was run away from him and the OLB didn't seal.
As to your last statement, obviously you haven't read anything on what I said I saw in that game, including the thread I started about what I saw.
-
Jackson will always get beat around in the running game. He isn't the RILB we need long term to run this 2-gap 3-4 defense, we all want Ted Johnson Jr, but we will have to wait. There are more pressing problems right now.
-
Dude, with all due respect, you put up four plays that netted 21-yards and used it in a positive light for our LB-defense. that's kind of like sayin, "Take away the INT, add a phantom TD and we scored 7-points ... add in the missed field goal and we only lost 17-10!"
Oh wait, you did say that too.
This was the best preseason game I bet you've ever watched ... the second time around.
Read my post, think, then respond. Not in reverse order.
"Is there concern about the LBs? Sure there still is." I think that just goes against your first sentance, as well as your first snippy comment. And do you think your Ricky Bobby with the "with all do respect" line.
I have no where made the statment about taking away the int, adding a phantom TD and CLE scored 7 or 10 points.
Then, "But I am not sure why you chose to single out Jackson and compare him to Davis. Jackson's line on running plays looks like this for the game (notice where the run was to as well):". Now look at that as solely about Jackson, and where the play was run at/to. I simply questioned singling out Jackson. Twice he did get in there and stuff the run. Twice he tackled up field when the ball was run away from him and the OLB didn't seal.
As to your last statement, obviously you haven't read anything on what I said I saw in that game, including the thread I started about what I saw.
Masters said:
Twice he did get in there and stuff the run. Twice he tackled up field when the ball was run away from him and the OLB didn't seal.You do realize that on a 3rd-and-1 call that netted 2-yards was a first down for the Packers right?
Later in the half, we stopped'em for a two-yard gain on 2nd-and-goal from the two .....
-
11) The bathroom stall outside the club seats needs a new latch.
12) The beer stand lower level by the hotdog stand needs to be colder.
13) People need to stop whining!
-
Masters said:
Twice he did get in there and stuff the run. Twice he tackled up field when the ball was run away from him and the OLB didn't seal.You do realize that on a 3rd-and-1 call that netted 2-yards was a first down for the Packers right?
Later in the half, we stopped'em for a two-yard gain on 2nd-and-goal from the two .....
You do realize that on a 3rd-and-1 call that netted 2-yards was a first down for the Packers right?
Later in the half, we stopped'em for a two-yard gain on 2nd-and-goal from the two .....
I do realize that and you know that my point had nothing to do with down, but only distance, which was your harp on Jackson and exaggeration of where he was tackling guys. Settle your feet their Fred Astaire, your tapping all around my comments and around you responding w/o reading/thinking the first time here.
Not sure what your goal is with that last attempt at a witty snide comment. Seeing as how I never said CLE stopped the run at all. I'll try an make this simple for you. Play of Jackson - one subject. Play of the CLE D as a whole against the run, different subject.
-
You do realize that on a 3rd-and-1 call that netted 2-yards was a first down for the Packers right?
Later in the half, we stopped'em for a two-yard gain on 2nd-and-goal from the two .....
I do realize that and you know that my point had nothing to do with down, but only distance, which was your harp on Jackson and exaggeration of where he was tackling guys. Settle your feet their Fred Astaire, your tapping all around my comments and around you responding w/o reading/thinking the first time here.
Not sure what your goal is with that last attempt at a witty snide comment. Seeing as how I never said CLE stopped the run at all. I'll try an make this simple for you. Play of Jackson - one subject. Play of the CLE D as a whole against the run, different subject.
Masters said:
I do realize that and you know that my point had nothing to do with down, but only distance, which was your harp on Jackson and exaggeration of where he was tackling guys.Seriously? a two-yard stop on 3rd-and-1 has nothing to do with the down or distance?
Maybe it was pass plays that I witnessed DQ getting caught in no man's land and playing chase, maybe it was the inside track and whiff on the 2nd-n-2 that resulted in a Packer rushing TD ... but whatever it was, I wasn't as impressed as you on what seems like a lone play in an entire half.
I singled him out as I hope he's our best defender to play behind Smith. I'd much rather be dwelling on a couple tackles for loss, or 3-and-outs he created, and not twelve-and-a-half minutes of ball possession by the Packers in the second quarter.
I won't apologize for the teams play, make excuses with ya, or celebrate Packer first downs from valiant defensive efforts. I'm disgusted. Deal with it.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login