October 26th, 2003


Previous Entry Next Entry
06:34 pm - on the bright side of things...
just think how much we'll appreciate it when they really do win one...

Current Mood: [mood icon] melancholy

(8 comments | Leave a comment)

 
on the bright side of things... - graffiti.maverick

• Recent Entries
• Friends
• Archive
> ChrisMaverick dot com
• profile


Art & Photography
> 365 Days of Mav
> Elseworld.com
> Mav's Flickr Stream
> MavTV (youtube)
> Party Nook

Wrestling
> International Males
> IWC Wrestling
> BDW Wrestling
> CWF Wrestling

Other
> 1KWFFH
> Mav's DVD Library
> Verdandi (currently down)
> Mav's Schedule (currently down)
> Mav's MySpace
chrismaverick. Get yours at flagrantdisregard.com/flickr

Comments:


[User Picture]From: nlanza Date: October 26th, 2003 - 03:46 pm (Link)
Think of it as a solidarity move with the Pirates and the Penguins.

This year all three local teams suck. It's a theme.
[User Picture]From: max1975 Date: October 26th, 2003 - 05:10 pm (Link)
I thought we were much improved again. The offensive line was actually protecting tommy and making holes for the bus, the defensive front seven was pretty awesome, and even the special teams(!) rocked.

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that if we had either a quarterback or a secondary, we might've won. If we had both, it woulda been a piece of cake.
[User Picture]From: cuddlyd00m Date: October 27th, 2003 - 12:20 pm (Link)
just think how much we'll appreciate it when they really do win one...

Wait a minute... they can do that? I'm very confused.

Personally, I think the best way to improve the team is to fire the secondary and replace them with a few kids from a local cub scout troop. At least they would try...
[User Picture]From: chrismaverick Date: October 27th, 2003 - 12:39 pm (Link)
that's not fair... the secondary totally tried yesterday. They were just playing a far superior team. Nothing they could do about that.

Now if you want to replace someone with the Cub Scouts, try the offensive line. They suck. Not that I'm trying to front on the cub scouts mind you... Troop 309 represent! WEST SIDE!!!
[User Picture]From: cuddlyd00m Date: October 27th, 2003 - 12:49 pm (Link)
To be completely honest, I blame it on the Defensive Coordinator. (We should replace _him_ with a brownie scout.) Those (very rare) plays where they went with a man defense, they did just fine. When they tried the zone, the Rams were making 20+ yard plays. Seems pretty simple to me. Unfortunately, the Steelers' defense is designed to be zone, so teams will keep picking them apart...

Gotta disagree about the Offensive Line. Did they suck? Yes. Is this the second time most of those guys have played the position they're playing? Also, yes. One hopes they're practicing their asses off this week, but I don't expect much from them until they learn to work with each other in their new positions. Also, Zeroue needs to remember that it's his job to pick up the blitz and block some of those incoming linebackers instead of heading for the sideline and waving his hand like an idiot, looking for the screen pass while Maddox is trying to pick up his spleen from where it just got knocked out.
[User Picture]From: wooble Date: October 27th, 2003 - 03:48 pm (Link)
If you really think Dewayne Washington can consistently cover Torry Holt one-on-one, you're smoking some bad crack.

In any case, the real problem was that the Rams' offensive line is really good, and there was pretty much no pass rush. And now, I don't think the Steelers' front 7 could be replaced by a boyscout troop. They're damn good but they got outplayed by a better offensive line then they've seen all year.

I'm kind of wondering if Faulk was benched for an extra game more because they didn't want to be tempted to try to run rather than because he really needed another week off. Against the Steelers, you pretty much know that trying to run to set up your passing game is pointless.
[User Picture]From: chrismaverick Date: October 27th, 2003 - 03:59 pm (Link)
I'm kind of wondering if Faulk was benched for an extra game more because they didn't want to be tempted to try to run rather than because he really needed another week off. Against the Steelers, you pretty much know that trying to run to set up your passing game is pointless.

Yeah, but that said, the Rams' backup still managed to rush 81 yards and 3 touchdowns... pretty damn good for "not trying to run"
[User Picture]From: cuddlyd00m Date: October 27th, 2003 - 05:52 pm (Link)
If you really think Dewayne Washington can consistently cover Torry Holt one-on-one, you're smoking some bad crack.

Hell, I don't care how good a corner you have, Torry Holt needs double coverage. And yes, I understand that that implies a zone elsewhere on the field. Heck, maybe that's what they should have done - set one back (rotating, to keep them fresh) on Holt at all times, and then played zone.

Back in the early 90's, when I lived in Dallas, I watched a lot of Cowboys games. That strategy was used consistently by opposing teams to keep Michael Irvin from touching the ball, and it worked. Other receivers will have an easier time, but you take the big-play man out of the game.

Seriously, though, I don't think that would have worked in this case. Too many good receivers, too good an offensive line... What have other teams done against the Rams? I remember hearing that the Steelers game was one of their best - how did other teams defend against them? A better pass rush?
 

• Go to Top
LiveJournal.com