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!

     

3-4 Defense..blah blah


Shocker

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, top dawg said:

Offense lost the game today, not the defense. The defense was helped by a couple of errant throws, but they weren't terrible. They're close.

The defense got methodically shredded in the second half.  I think the heat got to both teams. But they gave up a ton of rushing yards in the second half,  got no sacks, and Goff mostly had a lot of time to rhrow.  

We forced the Rams to punt only once in the entire second half.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Panthers played poor defense in the second half.  They burnt themselves out playing defense in the first and engaged a conservative strategy that did not win them the game in the second.  Overall they did pretty well we were within winning distance the whole game and it did not come together.  This is a good football team and they will continue to play like it but they need to turn these sorts of games into wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The defense played well enough to win. The offense did not. Remember that we're talking about a high-powered offense. But for offensive screw-ups, we win the game! I'm not worried about the defense at this point. No, they didn't get a sack, but they got some pressure. The inability to stop the run was a little troublesome, but that's what happens when you're gassed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Shocker said:

I did not see anything different today.  All CMC and nothing else.  Prove me wrong

Cam Newton sucks

 

That’s because you don’t understand context. It’s pretty dumb to run 3-4 against a team that runs a majority 11 personnel.

just remember, Cam is a far better player than you are an observer of football and even better than you are a message board poster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually ran a lot of 4 fronts that were really 3-4 looks based on gap scheme but takes an observant eye to see. That's part of why they added the mix in, they can run a 4-3 or 3-4 it look the same before the snap. After the snap and you see gap schemes and such is when you can tell. Also based on Rams scheme you want that extra db on the field most of the time. So much of the day was in nickel formations with both ILB dropping back into coverage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Davidson Deac II said:

The defense got methodically shredded in the second half.  I think the heat got to both teams. But they gave up a ton of rushing yards in the second half,  got no sacks, and Goff mostly had a lot of time to rhrow.  

We forced the Rams to punt only once in the entire second half.

They could do better. I wish Irvin was out there. It might have helped the run defense a little bit.

 We lost by 3 points with a missed fg, a fumble in fg territory,  and an int that led to 7 point for them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • When we drafted Luke, we already had Cam, Smith, Olsen, Stewart, Deangleo, Gross, Kalil, CJ, Hardy, Beason, TD, Gamble (and maybe more I'm forgetting), we had a lot of great pieces in place. Going pure BPA for a player with Luke's potential when the LB you already have is different when you already have all those pieces in place.  Our OL right now is probably in a better shape than that team and our RBs and TE have potential compared to proven vets back then, but after that, the 2012 roster was in a far better shape than we are right now. We need a #1 WR, DEs, LBs, DBs, C, and depending who you ask a QB.  Going BPA at pick #5 when that player is a DT and your current best player on either side of the ball is a DT, seems irresponsible. If he's the only player they like that high left, then you trade back and go with position of more need at a slot that makes sense for the player while adding other picks.  If you trade back and he falls because other teams don't need/want a DT, then you consider him at that point because of the value.    
    • This sounds like the same back and forth when we drafted a LB when we already had a LB or as mentioned prior back to back DLs. I want the BPA, if it is another DT so be it. (No not a kicker/punter for those people that think they are funny))
    • I’m hoping SMU messes it all up and wins out. Imagine the SEC & BI0 would crap themselves trying to “fix” the problem.
×
×
  • Create New...