Thread: Steve Smith

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1101286

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1101240

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1101237

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1101195

You talking Carolina Steve Smith?

Wouldn't be a bad option if we can't get Rice back.

Problem is, that gives us three receivers in that sort of small, quick build. Harvin, Smith and Aromashodu. We need an outside receiver.

LOL, you almost got it right. Rice is not an outside reciever.

From our good friends at Wiki....


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]

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.

Go easy on him. He is pretty serious about trying to play the right/wrong thing all the time.

In this case it bit him in the ass and I'm gonna have fun with it for a few days.:evil:

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1101286

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1101240

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1101237

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1101195

You talking Carolina Steve Smith?

Wouldn't be a bad option if we can't get Rice back.

Problem is, that gives us three receivers in that sort of small, quick build. Harvin, Smith and Aromashodu. We need an outside receiver.

LOL, you almost got it right. Rice is not an outside reciever.

From our good friends at Wiki....


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]

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.

Go easy on him. He is pretty serious about trying to play the right/wrong thing all the time.

In this case it bit him in the ass and I'm gonna have fun with it for a few days.:evil:

Originally Posted by "12purplepride28" #1101301

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1101286

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.

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1101451

Originally Posted by "12purplepride28" #1101301

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1101286

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.

On nfl.com's Everything To Prove. Kyle Rudolph told a caricature artist to draw him in purple and yellow not purple and gold, that asshole should be cut.

Doesn't even know football...

Originally Posted by "jessejames09" #1101494

On nfl.com's Everything To Prove. Kyle Rudolph told a caricature artist to draw him in purple and yellow not purple and gold, that asshole should be cut.

Doesn't even know football...

What do you expect from a Notre Dame education?

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1101451

Originally Posted by "12purplepride28" #1101301

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1101286

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.

Originally Posted by "12purplepride28" #1101522

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1101451

Originally Posted by "12purplepride28" #1101301

Originally Posted by "kevoncox" #1101286

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.

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.

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.