Official Post Game Thoughts, Observations, and Rants

**digital420** · 09-18-2007, 07:47 AM

"singersp" wrote:

"digital420" wrote:

i don't see it as M.M doesn't get the touches, or the respect he deserves.

He's had those chances.. he's been there as the #1 before, and never broke out. He seems to come in as a good change of pace, and a RB/small TE on 3rd downs. he's got quick feet, and can do lots of directional things that confuse defenders.

I can't wait 2 get CT back.. we need him as much as AP!!

and with M.M back there either returning punts, or watching the backs of our RB's, i feel a bit better that we have depth, and if someone's having a really horseShiTe game.. then u can stick one of the others in their place.

as for people raggin on TJack so much.. heh dind't loose the game for us. he scored a td, and we moved the ball on a few occasions a lot of green to make points, or 2 miss game winning points.

just the basic fact that we held them to such a low score, and we showed that no matter the QB we're getting preasure this year has me excited. The O will come.. it's all in the timing.. and who does Tjack have that he has estabilished time with?
only M.M, Twill, CT are here from last year.. so it's a learning group.. let them learn!!

DiGiTaL

You know, I've heard this a lot & disagree with it. Exactly how many points is no longer low?

When we switched to the WCO, proponents of that offense said we won't score a lot of points & it's about ball control, T.O.P. & defense, but we'd win ball games.

Shouldn't it be then, that 20 points should be enough to win ball games in that type of system?

People here said we would win ball games, but the scores would be low, yet when our opponents do it, they make it sound like we did a great job holding them to 20 points.

IMO, 20 points isn't exactly low.

u know singersp, what i ment was that we kept possibly one of the Better O's in the nfl today to a low scoring game. 20 points. although not as low as say 3, is far lower then what they did before us. And will probably do after us.

If we see the kitties go out and win games in the 30's and 40's.. then yes. 20 was a low score for them.

what i have to agree that i've seen is that people make the statement that if the D can hold them to say under 20, and we score near or over 20 we should win many games. the problem is our D can do it's job.. can the O

combined with the D.. we did it in w1
lets see w3

DiGiTaL

**PurpleTide** · 09-18-2007, 07:51 AM

The way I see it, we simply changed our gameplan for Detroit to exploit the secondary. We are a power team, and should never change our playing style. Tarvaris was asked to do far to much. We needed to run the ball more, as that is our strength. The passing game will get better, but we just have to stay a run first team. Some people around here expect to see perfection, you must let these young players get some more experience. Good and bad. We will find our stride in 3-4 more games, and it's refered to as Midseason Form. That's when coaches and players are tuned to what we do best and are executing plays that are called to fit our players skill sets.

**singersp** · 09-18-2007, 07:55 AM

"digital420" wrote:

"singersp" wrote:

"digital420" wrote:

i don't see it as M.M doesn't get the touches, or the respect he deserves.

He's had those chances.. he's been there as the #1 before, and never broke out. He seems to come in as a good change of pace, and a RB/small TE on 3rd downs. he's got quick feet, and can do lots of directional things that confuse defenders.

I can't wait 2 get CT back.. we need him as much as AP!!

and with M.M back there either returning punts, or watching the backs of our RB's, i feel a bit better that we have depth, and if someone's having a really horseShiTe game.. then u can stick one of the others in their place.

as for people raggin on TJack so much.. heh dind't loose the game for us. he scored a td, and we moved the ball on a few occasions a lot of green to make points, or 2 miss game winning points.

just the basic fact that we held them to such a low score, and we showed that no matter the QB we're getting preasure this year has me excited. The O will come.. it's all in the timing.. and who does Tjack have that he has estabilished time with?
only M.M, Twill, CT are here from last year.. so it's a learning group.. let them learn!!

DiGiTaL

You know, I've heard this a lot & disagree with it. Exactly how many points is no longer low?

When we switched to the WCO, proponents of that offense said we won't score a lot of points & it's about ball control, T.O.P. & defense, but we'd win ball games.

Shouldn't it be then, that 20 points should be enough to win ball games in that type of system?

People here said we would win ball games, but the scores would be low, yet when our opponents do it, they make it sound like we did a great job holding them to 20 points.

IMO, 20 points isn't exactly low.

u know singersp, what i ment was that we kept possibly one of the Better O's in the nfl today to a low scoring game. 20 points. although not as low as say 3, is far lower then what they did before us. And will probably do after us.

If we see the kitties go out and win games in the 30's and 40's.. then yes. 20 was a low score for them.

what i have to agree that i've seen is that people make the statement that if the D can hold them to say under 20, and we score near or over 20 we should win many games. the problem is our D can do it's job.. can the O

combined with the D.. we did it in w1

lets see w3

DiGiTaL

I said before the game that Detroit was a better team than what they got credit for. Most everyone else was saying how much they sucked & how we'd roll all over them with their pathetic "D" & their poor offense.

**Marrdro** · 09-18-2007, 08:07 AM

"PurpleTide" wrote:

The way I see it, we simply changed our gameplan for Detroit to exploit the secondary. We are a power team, and should never change our playing style. Tarvaris was asked to do far to much. We needed to run the ball more, as that is our strength. The passing game will get better, but we just have to stay a run first team. Some people around here expect to see perfection, you must let these young players get some more experience. Good and bad. We will find our stride in 3-4 more games, and it's refered to as Midseason Form. That's when coaches and players are tuned to what we do best and are executing plays that are called to fit our players skill sets.

Very nice.
I would just like to comment on one point....

I think they need to try to be more than just a run team.
If they don't let the boys try to exploit an obvious weakness a team has then the coaching staff doesn't work through the process of gameplanning, the players don't get the opportunity to execute and ultimately the will never grow as a team and get better.

Again, my rationale is that this is the year all the young guys get to grow during "On the Job Training" and if we don't do it know, how will we ever know if we have the right guys?

All part of the bigger picture my friends.
;D