Steve Smith

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

07-28-2011, 03:13 PM
Marrdro

Re: Steve Smith

Quote:

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1101484

Quote:

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1101451

Quote:

Originally Posted by "12purplepride28" #1101301

Quote:

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1101286

Quote:

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1101240

Are you telling me the flanker doesn't line up on the outside of the formation?

Drop the technical terms, it's getting old. We know you like to appear more educated in the game then anybody else by referring to receivers by the Y/Z who run 4 routes and 7 routes and 0 tech DT's, we all get it, we just choose not to play along.

Like you say, it's a "Discussion site". If I want to call a flanker an outside receiver (which he is), I damn well will.

Different people call things differently. I don't think you should be so quick to assume he was trying to purposely skirt the issue. Lighten up man.

I believe this is the important part of the post.

Nope Bleed and Caine are always hacking on me for not being factual with my discussion points.

Now, when I do it he starts with the "I'm trying to be smarter than everyone" crap.

He can't have it both ways. Either he wants me to play his game or not. Truth of the matter is, one way is just as fun as the other cause he gives me so much material to work with.

Are you trying to tell me a flanker is NOT an outside receiver?

ok then.

Nope, yet again you failed to follow the discussion.

You said Rice was an outside guy deep threat. I said he wasn't.
07-28-2011, 03:16 PM
i_bleed_purple

Re: Steve Smith

Quote:

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1101550

Nope, yet again you failed to follow the discussion.

You said Rice was an outside guy deep threat. I said he wasn't.

It is you who failed follow the discussion.

Me: Rice is an outside receiver

You: Rice is not an outside receiver

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marrdro

Rice

Flanker (Z or FL): A receiver lining up behind the line of scrimmage. Frequently the team's featured receiver, the flanker uses the initial buffer between himself and a defender to avoid jamming, legal contact within five yards of the line of scrimmage. The flanker is generally on the same side of the formation as a tight end. As with the split end, this receiver is the farthest player from the center on his side of the field. The flanker is probably lined up just like a split end except that he is just behind the line of scrimmage, being in the backfield and not on the line.[6]

Me: So a flanker isn't an outside receiver?

You: That's not what I said, you can't follow the discussion

Seems that's about how the discussion went, did I miss something?

Rice plays the flanker position frequently, Flanker is an outside receiver. therefore, it stands to reason, Rice is an outside receiver, since that's where he plays.
07-28-2011, 03:21 PM
Marrdro

Re: Steve Smith

Quote:

Originally Posted by "12purplepride28" #1101522

It just seems very "holier than thou" to post all that crap. I don't mind it so much but I don't understand all the terms and I'm fine with that, I still understand what's going on in the game fine and I have a huge passion for the Vikings and NFL. But when you post 0 tech NT and all that crap it just gets annoying.

Don't take it as "holier than thou". If someone says something about the game I dont' understand (and theres lots of it) I ask them.

In most cases, 9 out of 10 times I post the details or do a detailed thread on the breakdowns of things like the OL Gaps or the Techniques the DL men play.

Maybe I should go dig a few of those up. In the interim.....

Quote:

The techiques refer to being lined up directly against the lineman, or their inside or outside shoulder. So a "5" technique is being lined up directly on the offensive tackle (OT) - a "6" technique is the OT's outside shoulder, "4" the OT's inside shoulder.

Gaps are "A" (between C and OG), "B" (between OG and OT," or "C" (between OT and TE).

So a NT in a 3-4 playing a "0" technique with gap assignments to both "A" gaps - he is playing "0" techniqe, "A" gap assignemnt.

A RDE lined up just inside the TE's shoulder is playing "7" technique, assigned to shoot the "C" gap, etc.

Again, my intent is not to be "holier than thou" or "to confuse" or even to be "annoying" but rather talk football. Mostly cause I probably have just as big of a passion for it as you.

For me, I want to know everything there is about it and that means some of the finer points of it.
07-28-2011, 03:24 PM
Marrdro

Re: Steve Smith

Quote:

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1101527

Quote:

Originally Posted by "12purplepride28" #1101522

Quote:

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1101451

Quote:

Originally Posted by "12purplepride28" #1101301

Quote:

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1101286

Quote:

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1101240

Are you telling me the flanker doesn't line up on the outside of the formation?

Drop the technical terms, it's getting old. We know you like to appear more educated in the game then anybody else by referring to receivers by the Y/Z who run 4 routes and 7 routes and 0 tech DT's, we all get it, we just choose not to play along.

Like you say, it's a "Discussion site". If I want to call a flanker an outside receiver (which he is), I damn well will.

Different people call things differently. I don't think you should be so quick to assume he was trying to purposely skirt the issue. Lighten up man.

I believe this is the important part of the post.

Nope Bleed and Caine are always hacking on me for not being factual with my discussion points.

Now, when I do it he starts with the "I'm trying to be smarter than everyone" crap.

He can't have it both ways. Either he wants me to play his game or not. Truth of the matter is, one way is just as fun as the other cause he gives me so much material to work with.

It just seems very "holier than thou" to post all that crap. I don't mind it so much but I don't understand all the terms and I'm fine with that, I still understand what's going on in the game fine and I have a huge passion for the Vikings and NFL. But when you post 0 tech NT and all that crap it just gets annoying.

an FYI, the 0/1/3/5 tech has to do with how the player lines up on the DL and what hole they attack.

Visual on the holes:

------5---3----1--0-1----3----5----7
------LT---LG---C---RG---RT---TE

a little more in depth, you can use the 2/4/6 technique as well, which specifies what shoulder of the OL you line up on, but for matter of simplicity, we'll stay with the odd numbers and holes in general.

0 "hole" is directly above the center. playing the zero technique involves a NT simply plowing into the C head on, trying to plug up both "1 gaps (also known as an A gap)"

And as you can probably figure out, a 1(a) gap is lining up between the C and G, the 3(b) gap is lining up between the G and T, the 5(c) gap is outside the T, and the 7(d) gap is outside the TE.

really all you need to know to understand the 0/1/3 technique lingo.

So now, when discussing DT's, you can talk about how we need a 0/1 tech warpig, and come across nearly as impressive as Marrdro.

Hey you got something right. You have been listening.

Just kidding, great post. Isn't that more fun than yacking about using a outside guy as a inside guy?:P
07-28-2011, 03:25 PM
Marrdro

Re: Steve Smith

Quote:

Originally Posted by "midgensa" #1101530

I love this thread. It has taught me two things. First, if nobody declares which Steve Smith we are talking about then you get responses from people about both.
The Giants one is young and a FA while the Panthers one is old, not a FA and small as shit.

Second ... Apparently it is important which of these guys is the best 0 technique DT as well.

Like you 've never seen a thread on PPO wander off topic. Damn near everyone of them do.
07-28-2011, 03:26 PM
i_bleed_purple

Re: Steve Smith

Quote:

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1101553

Quote:

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1101527

Quote:

Originally Posted by "12purplepride28" #1101522

Quote:

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1101451

Quote:

Originally Posted by "12purplepride28" #1101301

Quote:

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1101286

Quote:

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1101240

Are you telling me the flanker doesn't line up on the outside of the formation?

Drop the technical terms, it's getting old. We know you like to appear more educated in the game then anybody else by referring to receivers by the Y/Z who run 4 routes and 7 routes and 0 tech DT's, we all get it, we just choose not to play along.

Like you say, it's a "Discussion site". If I want to call a flanker an outside receiver (which he is), I damn well will.

Different people call things differently. I don't think you should be so quick to assume he was trying to purposely skirt the issue. Lighten up man.

I believe this is the important part of the post.

Nope Bleed and Caine are always hacking on me for not being factual with my discussion points.

Now, when I do it he starts with the "I'm trying to be smarter than everyone" crap.

He can't have it both ways. Either he wants me to play his game or not. Truth of the matter is, one way is just as fun as the other cause he gives me so much material to work with.

It just seems very "holier than thou" to post all that crap. I don't mind it so much but I don't understand all the terms and I'm fine with that, I still understand what's going on in the game fine and I have a huge passion for the Vikings and NFL. But when you post 0 tech NT and all that crap it just gets annoying.

an FYI, the 0/1/3/5 tech has to do with how the player lines up on the DL and what hole they attack.

Visual on the holes:

------5---3----1--0-1----3----5----7
------LT---LG---C---RG---RT---TE

a little more in depth, you can use the 2/4/6 technique as well, which specifies what shoulder of the OL you line up on, but for matter of simplicity, we'll stay with the odd numbers and holes in general.

0 "hole" is directly above the center. playing the zero technique involves a NT simply plowing into the C head on, trying to plug up both "1 gaps (also known as an A gap)"

And as you can probably figure out, a 1(a) gap is lining up between the C and G, the 3(b) gap is lining up between the G and T, the 5(c) gap is outside the T, and the 7(d) gap is outside the TE.

really all you need to know to understand the 0/1/3 technique lingo.

So now, when discussing DT's, you can talk about how we need a 0/1 tech warpig, and come across nearly as impressive as Marrdro.

Hey you got something right. You have been listening.

Just kidding, great post. Isn't that more fun than yacking about using a outside guy as a inside guy?:P

no. I'm gonna call Rice an outside receiver, and Harvin a slot.

In fact, I'm going to call Rice a #1 receiver.
07-28-2011, 03:31 PM
Marrdro

Re: Steve Smith

Quote:

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1101555

Quote:

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1101553

Quote:

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1101527

Quote:

Originally Posted by "12purplepride28" #1101522

Quote:

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1101451

Quote:

Originally Posted by "12purplepride28" #1101301

Quote:

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1101286

Quote:

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1101240

Are you telling me the flanker doesn't line up on the outside of the formation?

Drop the technical terms, it's getting old. We know you like to appear more educated in the game then anybody else by referring to receivers by the Y/Z who run 4 routes and 7 routes and 0 tech DT's, we all get it, we just choose not to play along.

Like you say, it's a "Discussion site". If I want to call a flanker an outside receiver (which he is), I damn well will.

Different people call things differently. I don't think you should be so quick to assume he was trying to purposely skirt the issue. Lighten up man.

I believe this is the important part of the post.

Nope Bleed and Caine are always hacking on me for not being factual with my discussion points.

Now, when I do it he starts with the "I'm trying to be smarter than everyone" crap.

He can't have it both ways. Either he wants me to play his game or not. Truth of the matter is, one way is just as fun as the other cause he gives me so much material to work with.

It just seems very "holier than thou" to post all that crap. I don't mind it so much but I don't understand all the terms and I'm fine with that, I still understand what's going on in the game fine and I have a huge passion for the Vikings and NFL. But when you post 0 tech NT and all that crap it just gets annoying.

an FYI, the 0/1/3/5 tech has to do with how the player lines up on the DL and what hole they attack.

Visual on the holes:

------5---3----1--0-1----3----5----7
------LT---LG---C---RG---RT---TE

a little more in depth, you can use the 2/4/6 technique as well, which specifies what shoulder of the OL you line up on, but for matter of simplicity, we'll stay with the odd numbers and holes in general.

0 "hole" is directly above the center. playing the zero technique involves a NT simply plowing into the C head on, trying to plug up both "1 gaps (also known as an A gap)"

And as you can probably figure out, a 1(a) gap is lining up between the C and G, the 3(b) gap is lining up between the G and T, the 5(c) gap is outside the T, and the 7(d) gap is outside the TE.

really all you need to know to understand the 0/1/3 technique lingo.

So now, when discussing DT's, you can talk about how we need a 0/1 tech warpig, and come across nearly as impressive as Marrdro.

Hey you got something right. You have been listening.

Just kidding, great post. Isn't that more fun than yacking about using a outside guy as a inside guy?:P

no. I'm gonna call Rice an outside receiver, and Harvin a slot.

In fact, I'm going to call Rice a #1 receiver.

X, Y, and Z my friend. X, Y, and Z. The way a WCO spreads it around there is no clear defined number one target......:P
07-28-2011, 07:14 PM
midgensa

Re: Steve Smith

Quote:

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1101532

Quote:

Originally Posted by "midgensa" #1101530

I love this thread. It has taught me two things. First, if nobody declares which Steve Smith we are talking about then you get responses from people about both.
The Giants one is young and a FA while the Panthers one is old, not a FA and small as shit.

Second ... Apparently it is important which of these guys is the best 0 technique DT as well.

I was gonna say the samething. No one mentioned which Steve Smith.

Yeah ... it is kind of a big deal to mention that.

But ... really ... after like the fourth post, nobody mentioned ANY Steve Smith.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page