Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Ron Is Happy With What The Offense Is Doing


bobsfoodbasics

Recommended Posts

Just now, J.Cage said:

He was terrible?

 

well he played terrible aginst the bears the eagles game he was the reason we was in the game and maybe terrible was not the best word to use but he threw some costly ints in the eagles game and had 2 chances to win us the game in the end and failed to do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, beastson said:

You talked about 3 plays. This game didn't come down to those 3. We had a total of 11 drives. 3 were turnovers. 11-3 = 8 drives we didn't poo on

Sure - we had some bad drives. 4  3&outs.  4 out of 11.  Plus 1 drive ended in an interception on the third play, so really 5 3&outs.

but we had 6 good drives that should have netted points.

2 of these ended in turnovers, costing us points and giving up points.

We had a 56 yd. drive for a FG

We had a 63 yd. drive that ended the half (why can't we execute plays within 40 seconds I'll never understand - no one else seems to have this issue).

We drove from our 24 to bears 25 - ended on downs

We drove from our 20 to bears 35 - ended on downs

The drives that ended on downs probably yield points if we are not playing from 14 pts behind.

Those 2 turnovers for scores were just devastating.  They were the difference in the game - I have no idea how that is even a debate.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, thefuzz said:

If I were the head coach of a team, in 2017, with a competent QB at the helm, and just scored a total of 3 points.....I most certainly wouldn't be happy with anything, much less how the offense is operating.

Correction: -11 points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, grimesgoat said:

Sure - we had some bad drives. 4  3&outs.  4 out of 11.  Plus 1 drive ended in an interception on the third play, so really 5 3&outs.

but we had 6 good drives that should have netted points.

2 of these ended in turnovers, costing us points and giving up points.

We had a 56 yd. drive for a FG

We had a 63 yd. drive that ended the half (why can't we execute plays within 40 seconds I'll never understand - no one else seems to have this issue).

We drove from our 24 to bears 25 - ended on downs

We drove from our 20 to bears 35 - ended on downs

The drives that ended on downs probably yield points if we are not playing from 14 pts behind.

Those 2 turnovers for scores were just devastating.  They were the difference in the game - I have no idea how that is even a debate.

 

 

 

You mean they were able to somehow figure out Fox's bend but don't break defense for half the field but couldn't figure out how to get in the end zone?  I'm not seeing the positive here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

Don't waste your time.  These guys sounds just like Rivera, nothing but excuses.  They sound just like him.  Whaaa, we lost because we turned the ball over in the first half.

Never mind they couldn't do poo the rest of the game.  Pussies the lot of them.

Hey, I'm not making excuses.  There is no excuse for bumbling a pitch or chucking a fastball that ricochets off of a receiver's mitts.   But I can promise you that is not the play Shula called.  I doubt there are a lot of plays in the playbook designed to give the other team a TD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Jon Snow said:

You mean they were able to somehow figure out Fox's bend but don't break defense for half the field but couldn't figure out how to get in the end zone?  I'm not seeing the positive here.

You take what they give you.  If we have to kick 6 field goals to win you do it.  Chicago wasn't going to score more than 3-6 points on us, why help them out with a couple of gift TDs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, grimesgoat said:

You take what they give you.  If we have to kick 6 field goals to win you do it.  Chicago wasn't going to score more than 3-6 points on us, why help them out with a couple of gift TDs?

That's a losers mentality.  There is no way to spin only scoring 3 points in that game.  You can't see the forest for the trees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, grimesgoat said:

Time of Possession=38 minutes.  300 yards, 20 first downs, and 1 penalty.  Those are good numbers against a good defense on the road.  Without the turnovers we win easy.

We only put up 3 points. Without the turnovers it's a tie game, not "win easy," even with the defense dominating. And you can't ignore the turnovers. They weren't some fluke plays, they were both results of complete ineptitude across the offense. The offense is a MASSIVE problem. And has been all year outside of the NE game and the first half of the Lions game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, grimesgoat said:

You take what they give you.  If we have to kick 6 field goals to win you do it.  Chicago wasn't going to score more than 3-6 points on us, why help them out with a couple of gift TDs?

I agree with you on this, I'm perfectly fine with getting rid of Shula, but to think a new oc is going to solve player issues is ridiculous. Also is a little absurd to expect this offense, with the talent it has to put up 30+ on a top 10 defense, which is what some of you are expecting. An offense is going to struggle against good defenses, having a new oc call plays just so the same players can tip the ball in the air for ints, take sacks to knock us out of fg range, or o lineman just stand around looking lost instead of blocking is going to yield ultimately the same results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Darvinsun said:

Well, I didn't expect much different from run..I wish the Stephen As and Cowerds would roast  him like they roast Cam

That says all you need to know about this team. Nobody ever says what’s wrong with the Panthers, it’s always what’s wrong with Cam? Because Cam has to be great for us to win. Nevermind we don’t have a running game or a legit #1 WR and playing without Olsen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...