Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 46
  1. #11
    The Dropper's Avatar
    The Dropper is offline Star Spokesman
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Portland, Ore.
    Posts
    2,101

    Re: It's Been a long time, I shouldn't of left you :)

    "Zeus" wrote:
    "MediaLoca" wrote:
    lol, you don't understand how much i was explaining to my co-workers HOW bad the playcalling was.
    So - you have some great insight into the actual plays that were called - the blocking schemes, the adjustments made at the line of scrimmage as well as the opposing defenses that were called?

    Could you run down a few of those series in the first half, giving us the actual play-call (with the correct vernacular), as well as the line calls that Birk made when seeing the defensive line setup?
    That would be awesome!


    I've been waiting for someone with actual knowledge of what play was called to enlighten us all with their brilliance.

    =Z=
    Correct vernacular? Come on. And if someone told you that the play called was "Red 47 Far Donkey Whore" would that mean anything to you?

    He did a decent job of explaining the basic set up of what was happening on both sides of the ball, offered what he thought would remedy the situation, and pointed out that the remedy worked.

    We are not coaches; we are fans, obviously. No one on this board will ever be able to explain every call and line adjustment made (I doubt many coaches could), but does that mean that we are not allowed to break down the things that we can see and understand (at least to a degree)?

    In this case, MediaLoca called for a very specific formation, one that I think everyone can understand. He is a proponent of this formation and argued in favor of using it more until defenses make adjustments to it. What the fuck is wrong with that?

  2. #12
    El Vikingo's Avatar
    El Vikingo is offline Ring of Fame
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    4,358

    Re: It's Been a long time, I shouldn't of left you :)

    "Zeus" wrote:


    Una cerveza fria, por favor.

    = El Zeus =
    Now
    El underdog.

  3. #13
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: It's Been a long time, I shouldn't of left you :)

    "The" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    "MediaLoca" wrote:
    lol, you don't understand how much i was explaining to my co-workers HOW bad the playcalling was.
    So - you have some great insight into the actual plays that were called - the blocking schemes, the adjustments made at the line of scrimmage as well as the opposing defenses that were called?

    Could you run down a few of those series in the first half, giving us the actual play-call (with the correct vernacular), as well as the line calls that Birk made when seeing the defensive line setup?
    That would be awesome!


    I've been waiting for someone with actual knowledge of what play was called to enlighten us all with their brilliance.
    Correct vernacular? Come on. And if someone told you that the play called was "Red 47 Far Donkey Whore" would that mean anything to you?

    He did a decent job of explaining the basic set up of what was happening on both sides of the ball, offered what he thought would remedy the situation, and pointed out that the remedy worked.

    We are not coaches; we are fans, obviously. No one on this board will ever be able to explain every call and line adjustment made (I doubt many coaches could), but does that mean that we are not allowed to break down the things that we can see and understand (at least to a degree)?

    In this case, MediaLoca called for a very specific formation, one that I think everyone can understand. He is a proponent of this formation and argued in favor of using it more until defenses make adjustments to it. What the fuck is wrong with that?
    I have no problems breaking down what we (as fans) can see.

    I have huge problems with people saying "the playcalling sucked!" because not one of us knows what play was called, what defense was called and what line-of-scrimmage adjustments were made.

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  4. #14
    Webby's Avatar
    Webby is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Aug 1998
    Location
    A, A
    Posts
    8,976
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: It's Been a long time, I shouldn't of left you :)

    "The" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    "MediaLoca" wrote:
    lol, you don't understand how much i was explaining to my co-workers HOW bad the playcalling was.
    So - you have some great insight into the actual plays that were called - the blocking schemes, the adjustments made at the line of scrimmage as well as the opposing defenses that were called?

    Could you run down a few of those series in the first half, giving us the actual play-call (with the correct vernacular), as well as the line calls that Birk made when seeing the defensive line setup?
    That would be awesome!


    I've been waiting for someone with actual knowledge of what play was called to enlighten us all with their brilliance.

    =Z=
    Correct vernacular? Come on. And if someone told you that the play called was "Red 47 Far Donkey Whore" would that mean anything to you?

    He did a decent job of explaining the basic set up of what was happening on both sides of the ball, offered what he thought would remedy the situation, and pointed out that the remedy worked.

    We are not coaches; we are fans, obviously. No one on this board will ever be able to explain every call and line adjustment made (I doubt many coaches could), but does that mean that we are not allowed to break down the things that we can see and understand (at least to a degree)?

    In this case, MediaLoca called for a very specific formation, one that I think everyone can understand. He is a proponent of this formation and argued in favor of using it more until defenses make adjustments to it. What the floop is wrong with that?
    Yeah, Dropper, I think some people better learn to tone done the rhetoric for which they themselves unwittingly become the very thing they claim to despise.

    Random discussions of formations are just fine, and I don't need to know shit about what Chili calls them in his playbook, or the slang the players use for it.
    It could be "get bent condescending tough guys 45 wide right donkey spew" for all I know.
    8)

  5. #15
    Webby's Avatar
    Webby is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Aug 1998
    Location
    A, A
    Posts
    8,976
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: It's Been a long time, I shouldn't of left you :)

    "Zeus" wrote:
    "The" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    "MediaLoca" wrote:
    lol, you don't understand how much i was explaining to my co-workers HOW bad the playcalling was.
    So - you have some great insight into the actual plays that were called - the blocking schemes, the adjustments made at the line of scrimmage as well as the opposing defenses that were called?

    Could you run down a few of those series in the first half, giving us the actual play-call (with the correct vernacular), as well as the line calls that Birk made when seeing the defensive line setup?
    That would be awesome!


    I've been waiting for someone with actual knowledge of what play was called to enlighten us all with their brilliance.
    Correct vernacular? Come on. And if someone told you that the play called was "Red 47 Far Donkey Whore" would that mean anything to you?

    He did a decent job of explaining the basic set up of what was happening on both sides of the ball, offered what he thought would remedy the situation, and pointed out that the remedy worked.

    We are not coaches; we are fans, obviously. No one on this board will ever be able to explain every call and line adjustment made (I doubt many coaches could), but does that mean that we are not allowed to break down the things that we can see and understand (at least to a degree)?

    In this case, MediaLoca called for a very specific formation, one that I think everyone can understand. He is a proponent of this formation and argued in favor of using it more until defenses make adjustments to it. What the floop is wrong with that?
    I have no problems breaking down what we (as fans) can see.

    I have huge problems with people saying "the playcalling sucked!" because not one of us knows what play was called, what defense was called and what line-of-scrimmage adjustments were made.

    =Z=
    And because of that, guess what, they could be right too.
    I don't need to know how shit is made to know it stinks.

  6. #16
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: It's Been a long time, I shouldn't of left you :)

    "Webby" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    "The" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    "MediaLoca" wrote:
    lol, you don't understand how much i was explaining to my co-workers HOW bad the playcalling was.
    So - you have some great insight into the actual plays that were called - the blocking schemes, the adjustments made at the line of scrimmage as well as the opposing defenses that were called?

    Could you run down a few of those series in the first half, giving us the actual play-call (with the correct vernacular), as well as the line calls that Birk made when seeing the defensive line setup?
    That would be awesome!


    I've been waiting for someone with actual knowledge of what play was called to enlighten us all with their brilliance.
    Correct vernacular? Come on. And if someone told you that the play called was "Red 47 Far Donkey Whore" would that mean anything to you?

    He did a decent job of explaining the basic set up of what was happening on both sides of the ball, offered what he thought would remedy the situation, and pointed out that the remedy worked.

    We are not coaches; we are fans, obviously. No one on this board will ever be able to explain every call and line adjustment made (I doubt many coaches could), but does that mean that we are not allowed to break down the things that we can see and understand (at least to a degree)?

    In this case, MediaLoca called for a very specific formation, one that I think everyone can understand. He is a proponent of this formation and argued in favor of using it more until defenses make adjustments to it. What the floop is wrong with that?
    I have no problems breaking down what we (as fans) can see.

    I have huge problems with people saying "the playcalling sucked!" because not one of us knows what play was called, what defense was called and what line-of-scrimmage adjustments were made.
    And because of that, guess what, they could be right too.

    I don't need to know how shit is made to know it stinks.
    Then say that.


    "From what I saw, the Vikings were in a 4-WR set, with 1 RB and called a draw.
    Against the Packers Dime coverage (6 CBs, 1 LB and 4 DL-men), that draw was a great call."

    Or:

    "We could see that the Vikings had their base defense on the field.
    Now, I'm not sure if they were in tight man-to-man or zone coverage, but the pressure from the blitzing LBs was picked up and Rodgers was able to find a hole in the coverage and complete the pass to the TE."

    Rather than:

    "Man, that play-call sucked.
    The coaches suck.
    They all suck.
    They all should be fired.
    Yadda, yadda, yadda."

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    1,160

    Re: It's Been a long time, I shouldn't of left you :)

    "El" wrote:
    nice post for being media-loca,half crazy ,are you related to some spanish heritage or something?


    P.S I won´t stop till I find a spanish talker here....
    Yo hablo un poco espanol. I'm not sure if that's how you say "a little Spanish," but I think it would at least get the point across.

    Unfortunately, all I know is two years of high school spanish and you're probably looking for someone fluent. I am taking a college course this winter though.
    WE CAN BUILD ON THIS!!!

    In AP I trust

  8. #18
    Webby's Avatar
    Webby is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Aug 1998
    Location
    A, A
    Posts
    8,976
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: It's Been a long time, I shouldn't of left you :)

    "Zeus" wrote:
    "Webby" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    "The" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    [quote author=MediaLoca link=topic=47786.msg834853#msg834853 date=1221201212]
    lol, you don't understand how much i was explaining to my co-workers HOW bad the playcalling was.
    So - you have some great insight into the actual plays that were called - the blocking schemes, the adjustments made at the line of scrimmage as well as the opposing defenses that were called?

    Could you run down a few of those series in the first half, giving us the actual play-call (with the correct vernacular), as well as the line calls that Birk made when seeing the defensive line setup?
    That would be awesome!


    I've been waiting for someone with actual knowledge of what play was called to enlighten us all with their brilliance.
    Correct vernacular? Come on. And if someone told you that the play called was "Red 47 Far Donkey Whore" would that mean anything to you?

    He did a decent job of explaining the basic set up of what was happening on both sides of the ball, offered what he thought would remedy the situation, and pointed out that the remedy worked.

    We are not coaches; we are fans, obviously. No one on this board will ever be able to explain every call and line adjustment made (I doubt many coaches could), but does that mean that we are not allowed to break down the things that we can see and understand (at least to a degree)?

    In this case, MediaLoca called for a very specific formation, one that I think everyone can understand. He is a proponent of this formation and argued in favor of using it more until defenses make adjustments to it. What the floop is wrong with that?
    I have no problems breaking down what we (as fans) can see.

    I have huge problems with people saying "the playcalling sucked!" because not one of us knows what play was called, what defense was called and what line-of-scrimmage adjustments were made.
    And because of that, guess what, they could be right too.

    I don't need to know how pooh is made to know it stinks.
    Then say that.


    "From what I saw, the Vikings were in a 4-WR set, with 1 RB and called a draw.
    Against the Packers Dime coverage (6 CBs, 1 LB and 4 DL-men), that draw was a great call."

    Or:

    "We could see that the Vikings had their base defense on the field.
    Now, I'm not sure if they were in tight man-to-man or zone coverage, but the pressure from the blitzing LBs was picked up and Rodgers was able to find a hole in the coverage and complete the pass to the TE."

    Rather than:

    "Man, that play-call sucked.
    The coaches suck.
    They all suck.
    They all should be fired.
    Yadda, yadda, yadda."

    =Z=
    [/quote]

    I didn't realize the entire membership needed to form their statements around the Zeus book of right.

    Folks who make generalizations DO NOT generally get into the longer, deeper discussions to the nitty gritty.
    This is a place that ALL PEOPLE can feel comfortable expressing their emotions, frustrations, and elation.
    Those who engage in technical discussions have lots of opportunity to do so here.


    Shall we create a forum that says, "Only folks with knowledge of specifics of football mechanics, who are then obviously the most worthy of fans, can post here."?

    There is room for all modes of discussion, and there is no gatekeeper on the correct formatting of assertions.

  9. #19
    Webby's Avatar
    Webby is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Aug 1998
    Location
    A, A
    Posts
    8,976
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: It's Been a long time, I shouldn't of left you :)

    "farvathevikinglover" wrote:
    "El" wrote:
    nice post for being media-loca,half crazy ,are you related to some spanish heritage or something?


    P.S I won´t stop till I find a spanish talker here....
    Yo hablo un poco espanol. I'm not sure if that's how you say "a little Spanish," but I think it would at least get the point across.

    Unfortunately, all I know is two years of high school spanish and you're probably looking for someone fluent. I am taking a college course this winter though.
    The mrs is fluent.
    Watch for her posts...then get her on her spanish.
    She feels rusty, be good for her to shake it off.

  10. #20
    Zeus's Avatar
    Zeus is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Minnesota.
    Posts
    23,937

    Re: It's Been a long time, I shouldn't of left you :)

    "Webby" wrote:
    "Zeus" wrote:
    "Webby" wrote:
    And because of that, guess what, they could be right too.

    I don't need to know how pooh is made to know it stinks.
    Then say that.


    "From what I saw, the Vikings were in a 4-WR set, with 1 RB and called a draw.
    Against the Packers Dime coverage (6 CBs, 1 LB and 4 DL-men), that draw was a great call."

    Or:

    "We could see that the Vikings had their base defense on the field.
    Now, I'm not sure if they were in tight man-to-man or zone coverage, but the pressure from the blitzing LBs was picked up and Rodgers was able to find a hole in the coverage and complete the pass to the TE."

    Rather than:

    "Man, that play-call sucked.
    The coaches suck.
    They all suck.
    They all should be fired.
    Yadda, yadda, yadda."
    I didn't realize the entire membership needed to form their statements around the Zeus book of right.
    Is that what I said?
    Or wrote?
    Nope.

    Folks who make generalizations DO NOT generally get into the longer, deeper discussions to the nitty gritty.
    This is a place that ALL PEOPLE can feel comfortable expressing their emotions, frustrations, and elation.

    Those who engage in technical discussions have lots of opportunity to do so here.
    My point/stance has not changed since the day I joined PPO:
    NONE of us know what play was called, what defense was called, what adjustments were made at the line-of-scrimmage.

    No where have I said that I know anything more than anyone else.
    I know only what I can see.
    I don't have any special insight.
    I don't think it's too much to ask others to realize their own lack of knowledge.

    Shall we create a forum that says, "Only folks with knowledge of specifics of football mechanics, who are then obviously the most worthy of fans, can post here."?

    There is room for all modes of discussion, and there is no gatekeeper on the correct formatting of assertions.
    That will be a very quiet forum.
    I can't think of *any* member of PPO (outside of Brian Robison) who has actually played football at a professional level.
    There's one guy (Del) who has great knowledge of the game at a college/university level, having both played and coached.

    But, even then, he can only infer what plays were called.

    Here's a prime example:
    the MNF crew criticized Tyrell Johnson for "biting on a fake" on the long completion from Rodgers to Greg Jennings over Charles Gordon's pretty-good coverage.
    So, lots of PPOers (myself included) have picked at Johnson for that mistake.

    But in the paper today, there's an article which says he didn't have busted coverage and he wasn't out of position on that play.

    http://www.startribune.com/sports/vi...L7PQLanchO7DiU

    Cornerback Antoine Winfield also said Johnson did nothing wrong on the play.

    "I think it was bad that they kind of blamed that one big play on him," Winfield said. "That wasn't his fault. It wasn't him at all. It had absolutely nothing to do with him. He did the right thing, what he was supposed to do. Jennings just made a great play."
    So - the TV guys (it was Jaworski, who I have great respect for) were wrong, the fans (including me) were wrong and what our eyes tell us just wasn't right.

    I have no issues with people having opinions.
    But when those opinions are masked as FACT, that's when my cankers get sore.

    =Z=

    Thanks to Josdin for the awesome sig!

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. It's been a long time
    By uncle tony in forum Free Beer!
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 02-01-2010, 09:52 AM
  2. Long time follower first time poster
    By virginiaisforvikinglovers in forum Free Beer!
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 11-06-2009, 05:59 PM
  3. Long Time Reader First Time Poster.
    By 5vikingsrule6 in forum Free Beer!
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-31-2008, 07:46 AM
  4. Long Time Fan, New Here
    By BonScott in forum Free Beer!
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 02-09-2006, 08:20 PM
  5. long time lurker first time poster
    By campstove in forum Free Beer!
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-04-2005, 07:46 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •