Comments
"Clear facts"
But the game ain’t played on paper!!! This makes me like Mora even more. I thought it was a questionable gameplan, but I didn’t assume it was the wrong approach. It was bold, which I liked. Hearing the reasoning behind it makes me feel more comfortable.
No use wondering if we’d kept 8 in coverage if it woulda helped. Teams aren’t dumb, and Warner and Whisenhunt certainly are quite astute, and they’d have figured it out. Maybe they did and we had to adjust and did. Nothing can be done about that, now.
More and more this year, though, I am left wondering why the NFL hasn’t written in the chapter in the book that says facing a premier pocket passing QB you collapse the front of the pocket.
Not that teams aren’t trying to do that, and again, like Mushasi said, not to overuse one weapon, by any means. But from my layman’s perspective I would think the approach to Manning, Warner and Favre would be to concentrate pressure up the middle. Enable pass rush by brute force. Have three guys attack the A gaps while you drop someone back or into the flat while moving Curry over to cover middle. Just leave them no room to step up, buy time by making them slide over, flush them out.
I mean on both sides of the ball heightened resources are dedicated to the edge rush. Premier tackles and premier ends. Even guys like you and me can quite easily gauge a QB’s general pocket presence his movement in the pocket as the edge wraps around, it’s automatic. It’s been a fundamental tactical platform — THE fundamental defensive tactical platform, with passing offense correlating most highly to winning — since Buddy Ryan and Lawrence Taylor.
There has to be more teams, less equipped, to mitigate increased, even persistent pressure, right up front. I don’t want to be myopic about it, but I just can’t fathom it wouldn’t make a dramatic difference and that teams with average talent like ours couldn’t execute it with moderate consistency.
by jacobstevens on Nov 17, 2009 4:18 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I fail to see the connection between Moore, Omon, and this.
I like Omon, and am excited we signed him. I’m surprised he didn’t make the active roster. Maybe he will over the next few weeks.
by Misfit74 on Nov 17, 2009 4:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Did you click the fanshot link?
The article is mostly about the Hawks current 4-man front’s lack of pressure, and jacobstevens is replying to that
by Vasilii on Nov 17, 2009 6:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Then the title of the post is misleading.
Why post that title and link to an article not founded on the two described roster moves? Titles of posts should not be based on an ‘oh by the way’ footnote following a lengthy and entirely unrelated article, IMO. Oh well, carry on. :)
by Misfit74 on Nov 17, 2009 8:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, what Dukeshire found noteworthy was the roster move.
I hadn’t seen it anywhere else, so it was a good posting. Then I read it and commented. With a book. And didn’t preface it with any distancing of Dukeshire’s topic or specifying the link’s other content as context. So I can understand all that. Mostly I shoot fromthe hip, and sometimes how it comes across like this is lost on me.
by jacobstevens on Nov 18, 2009 10:15 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

















