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!

     

Enter your logical reasons for not double teaming Fitz.

pstall

By pstall,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

Newtcase Experienced

Newtcase

Posted
Posted

He was doubled on the first deep play and he went and got it between two defenders. Doubling Fitz will not stop him anymore than doubling Smith stops him, might as well use that extra defender to try to stop someone else/blitz/or stop the run. The only thing that stops Fitz is himself or Warner. I thought that was pretty evident.

With that said there were a number of plays where Fitz was all by his lonesome. I do believe we should have put at least one guy on him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ashehudson Newbie

ashehudson

Posted
Posted

Zod, I mean this in the most heterosexual way possible...... I liked your old Avatar better...

Fox wants Boldin. To do so, Fox wanted to make Fitz look REALLY REALLY good in a playoff game so he'll demand more money and the Cards are forced to cut Boldin allowing Fox to pick him up.....

I tried...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CarolinaSock Explorer

CarolinaSock

Posted
Posted

Turds gameplan was to have so much room between defenders and Fitz that he would start to question whether he was actually awake playing the game or dreaming. Turd then hoped he would stop running routes and start pinching himself or run closer to defenders in the hope of waking himself up. Unfortunately not even in his dreams is Fitz that wide open so he never fell for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyclonus Newbie

Cyclonus

Posted
Posted

I'll take a stab at this.

They didn't know Boldin wasn't going to play until just before game time. They practiced all week expecting to face him and Fitz. You obviously can't double cover them both. Once they realized Boldin wouldn't play, it was too late to change coverage schemes?

I could be totally wrong. This game reminded me of what Smitty did to Chicago in 2005.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pstall Newbie

pstall

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I'll take a stab at this.

They didn't know Boldin wasn't going to play until just before game time. They practiced all week expecting to face him and Fitz. You obviously can't double cover them both. Once they realized Boldin wouldn't play, it was too late to change coverage schemes?

I could be totally wrong. This game reminded me of what Smitty did to Chicago in 2005.

totally agree

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ja Rhule Grand Master

Ja Rhule

Posted
Posted

I'll take a stab at this.

They didn't know Boldin wasn't going to play until just before game time. They practiced all week expecting to face him and Fitz. You obviously can't double cover them both. Once they realized Boldin wouldn't play, it was too late to change coverage schemes?

I could be totally wrong. This game reminded me of what Smitty did to Chicago in 2005.

Yeap, Gamble was covering Breaston... Fox failed to adjust and it cost us. Fox never adjust... Hes one stubborn motherfuger..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KingsoftheSouth Newbie

KingsoftheSouth

Posted
Posted

I'll take a stab at this.

They didn't know Boldin wasn't going to play until just before game time. They practiced all week expecting to face him and Fitz. You obviously can't double cover them both. Once they realized Boldin wouldn't play, it was too late to change coverage schemes?

I could be totally wrong. This game reminded me of what Smitty did to Chicago in 2005.

why in the hell would you choose to double cover boldin over fitz, if they were both playing? boldin is good but fitz is on another level, even if boldin played they should have been double covering fitz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...