Printable View
kevin Siefret had a good article on ESPN today.
Sometimes coachs just tend to overthink a situation and outsmart themselves.
Kevin does a good job of describing the Marty Brooker touchdown in Chicago with some pretty good insights.
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/nfcnorth/...oning-out.html
The zone blitz concept isn't anything that is really new here my friends.
Alot of teams do it.
Is it a gamble?
Sure, but sometimes it works to perfection.
In fact, didn't we see a DL (for the Browns I think) get a INT dropping back into coverage just 2 weeks ago or something?
A revelation by Kevin Seifert does not a revelation make.
"Marrdro" wrote:
Quote:
The zone blitz concept isn't anything that is really new here my friends.
Alot of teams do it.
Is it a gamble?
Sure, but sometimes it works to perfection.
In fact, didn't we see a DL (for the Browns I think) get a INT dropping back into coverage just 2 weeks ago or something?
I can't kill Chilly or Frazier on this one, because it shows they are at least trying to mix things up. But I would much rather see Allen bullrushing the QB, or in a stunt, than dropping into pass coverage. He is so good at picking up screens and tipping passes while rushing...he's much more valuable there.
"Bkfldviking" wrote:
I have never been a big fan of the concept. But to place it in context, it was the end of the third quarter. We were not getting enough pressure with our front four alone. So the cover 2 wasn't keeping Orton from succeeding. Therefore we gambled with some zone blitzing. That time it backfired.Quote:
kevin Siefret had a good article on ESPN today.
Sometimes coachs just tend to overthink a situation and outsmart themselves.
Kevin does a good job of describing the Marty Brooker touchdown in Chicago with some pretty good insights.
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/nfcnorth/...oning-out.html
Sometimes it works.
Childress' "cute" little schemes are what's going to get him fired... I say keep it up, Chilly!!!
I can hear the responses now, "But that's Fraiser's job"...
Well, Childress ovbiously had some hand in it if he answered questions about it in the press conference and even said they decided to run the play because of the "element of surprise."
Well, that "element" got the Bears a TD, genius.
"C" wrote:
A single play in the game that Seifert decided to disect because he doesn't understand a defense very well.Quote:
Childress' "cute" little schemes are what's going to get him fired... I say keep it up, Chilly!!!
I can hear the responses now, "But that's Fraiser's job"...
Well, Childress ovbiously had some hand in it if he answered questions about it in the press conference and even said they decided to run the play because of the "element of surprise."
Well, that "element" got the Bears a TD, genius.
It is a common scheme and works sometimes and does not.
You should seriously stick to the hatred of Childress on some of the items that actually are somewhat believable.
"Prophet" wrote:
There are COUNTLESS times Childress hasQuote:
"C" wrote:
A single play in the game that Seifert decided to disect because he doesn't understand a defense very well.Quote:
Childress' "cute" little schemes are what's going to get him fired... I say keep it up, Chilly!!!
I can hear the responses now, "But that's Fraiser's job"...
Well, Childress ovbiously had some hand in it if he answered questions about it in the press conference and even said they decided to run the play because of the "element of surprise."
Well, that "element" got the Bears a TD, genius.
It is a common scheme and works sometimes and does not.
You should seriously stick to the hatred of Childress on some of the items that actually are somewhat believable.
done this, and simply alluding to the latest example doesn't diffuse the argument at all.
Over the past couple weeks alone there have been questions about the two point conversion, the punt with two minutes left, punting the ball the Reggie Bush, the T-Jack debacle..
The list goes on and on.
"C" wrote:
The two-pt conversion was with well over a quarter left and it was a judgement call.Quote:
"Prophet" wrote:
There are COUNTLESS times Childress hasQuote:
"C" wrote:
A single play in the game that Seifert decided to disect because he doesn't understand a defense very well.Quote:
Childress' "cute" little schemes are what's going to get him fired... I say keep it up, Chilly!!!
I can hear the responses now, "But that's Fraiser's job"...
Well, Childress ovbiously had some hand in it if he answered questions about it in the press conference and even said they decided to run the play because of the "element of surprise."
Well, that "element" got the Bears a TD, genius.
It is a common scheme and works sometimes and does not.
You should seriously stick to the hatred of Childress on some of the items that actually are somewhat believable.
done this, and simply alluding to the latest example doesn't diffuse the argument at all.
Over the past couple weeks alone there have been questions about the two point conversion, the punt with two minutes left, punting the ball the Reggie Bush, the T-Jack debacle..
The list goes on and on.
The punt with two minutes left was retarded.
The Reggie Bush episode was not on his shoulders.
The TJack debacle is his.
That makes 2/5 of the points that you brought up relevant.
There are plenty of completely retarded events that have occurred.
Why water down the real ones with the fallacies?
"C" wrote:
Perhaps you should try to become the next Vikings coach since you seem to have all the answers to why Chilly is failing.Quote:
"Prophet" wrote:
There are COUNTLESS times Childress hasQuote:
"C" wrote:
A single play in the game that Seifert decided to disect because he doesn't understand a defense very well.Quote:
Childress' "cute" little schemes are what's going to get him fired... I say keep it up, Chilly!!!
I can hear the responses now, "But that's Fraiser's job"...
Well, Childress ovbiously had some hand in it if he answered questions about it in the press conference and even said they decided to run the play because of the "element of surprise."
Well, that "element" got the Bears a TD, genius.
It is a common scheme and works sometimes and does not.
You should seriously stick to the hatred of Childress on some of the items that actually are somewhat believable.
done this, and simply alluding to the latest example doesn't diffuse the argument at all.
Over the past couple weeks alone there have been questions about the two point conversion, the punt with two minutes left, punting the ball the Reggie Bush, the T-Jack debacle..
The list goes on and on.