AZ54 Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 They ran Wolfe up the middle again, a couple times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 They ran Wolfe up the middle again, a couple times. LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 They ran Wolfe up the middle again, a couple times. LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChileBear Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 LOL That's just Turner trying to confuse the opposition. Or is it banging his head against a wall? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 They ran 1 screen pass to him and it went for 12 yards on 3rd and 25. Obviously, that's the smart play there, but why not do that on 1st down? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 5, 2009 Report Share Posted October 5, 2009 Down, distance, and situation. Down, distance, and situation. When the runs up the gut with Wolfe were called, the defense had a lot more to worry about, and had to respect the passing game. Not only that, but Detroit's defense is not good at all. It's completely different than running out of your own goal against the Minnesota wall of fat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted October 6, 2009 Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 Well said... Down, distance, and situation. Down, distance, and situation. When the runs up the gut with Wolfe were called, the defense had a lot more to worry about, and had to respect the passing game. Not only that, but Detroit's defense is not good at all. It's completely different than running out of your own goal against the Minnesota wall of fat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted October 6, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 6, 2009 Down, distance, and situation. Down, distance, and situation. When the runs up the gut with Wolfe were called, the defense had a lot more to worry about, and had to respect the passing game. Not only that, but Detroit's defense is not good at all. It's completely different than running out of your own goal against the Minnesota wall of fat. It was a 2 yard TD run up the middle. Not much different than 3rd and short as far as how a defense approaches it except there's no need to worry about anyone going deep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 7, 2009 Report Share Posted October 7, 2009 It was a 2 yard TD run up the middle. Not much different than 3rd and short as far as how a defense approaches it except there's no need to worry about anyone going deep. Way to conveniently forget the down and situation. Down, distance, situation. Of the three, only the distance is the same. The down is important because on 3rd, a team is much more locked into a run because a QB can't throw the ball away on a passing play that doesn't work. That's why the run happens so often, and why the unorthodox pass surprises the defense so much. The situation is also important. In this case, the Bears already ran two play-action, QB roll outs for short TD passes to the TE, so the situation made it difficult for Detroit to determine what the play would be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azbearsfan Posted October 8, 2009 Report Share Posted October 8, 2009 Way to conveniently forget the down and situation. Down, distance, situation. Of the three, only the distance is the same. The down is important because on 3rd, a team is much more locked into a run because a QB can't throw the ball away on a passing play that doesn't work. That's why the run happens so often, and why the unorthodox pass surprises the defense so much. The situation is also important. In this case, the Bears already ran two play-action, QB roll outs for short TD passes to the TE, so the situation made it difficult for Detroit to determine what the play would be. Come on man. Just because you say "Down Distance and Situation" doesn't make it the end all be all for when teams are expecting run. Teams do in fact expect run on down other than 3rd and 1. Those two play action passes came on 2nd and goal from the 2 and 4th and goal from the one. Little different than first and goal. In fact, we had a first and goal inside the ten three times and ran all three times, the last one was Wolfe's score. So looking at these facts you could say that Det was expecting the run more than the pass in the last case. Plus the fact that we were up big and not likely to subject Cutler to getting hit. On the bright side, your obsession with this play is hilarious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 9, 2009 Report Share Posted October 9, 2009 Come on man. Just because you say "Down Distance and Situation" doesn't make it the end all be all for when teams are expecting run. Teams do in fact expect run on down other than 3rd and 1. Those two play action passes came on 2nd and goal from the 2 and 4th and goal from the one. Little different than first and goal. In fact, we had a first and goal inside the ten three times and ran all three times, the last one was Wolfe's score. So looking at these facts you could say that Det was expecting the run more than the pass in the last case. Plus the fact that we were up big and not likely to subject Cutler to getting hit. On the bright side, your obsession with this play is hilarious. What's more hilarious is your apparent lack of football knowledge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azbearsfan Posted October 9, 2009 Report Share Posted October 9, 2009 What's more hilarious is your apparent lack of football knowledge. lol Whatever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted October 9, 2009 Report Share Posted October 9, 2009 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091007/ap_on_..._annoying_words By MICHAEL HILL, Associated Press Writer Michael Hill, Associated Press Writer – Wed Oct 7, 3:25 pm ET So, you know, it is what it is, but Americans are totally annoyed by the use of "whatever" in conversations. The popular slacker term of indifference was found "most annoying in conversation" by 47 percent of Americans surveyed in a Marist College poll released Wednesday. "Whatever" easily beat out "you know," which especially grated a quarter of respondents. The other annoying contenders were "anyway" (at 7 percent), "it is what it is" (11 percent) and "at the end of the day" (2 percent). "Whatever" — pronounced "WHAT'-ehv-errr" when exasperated — is an expression with staying power. Immortalized in song by Nirvana ("oh well, whatever, nevermind") in 1991, popularized by the Valley girls in "Clueless" later that decade, it is still commonly used, often by younger people. It can be an all-purpose argument-ender or a signal of apathy. And it can really be annoying. The poll found "whatever" to be consistently disliked by Americans regardless of their race, gender, age, income or where they live. "It doesn't surprise me because 'whatever' is in a special class, probably," said Michael Adams, author of "Slang: The People's Poetry" and an associate professor of English at Indiana University. "It's a word that — and it depends how a speaker uses it — can suggest dismissiveness." Adams, who was not involved in the poll and is not annoyed by "whatever," points out that its use is not always negative. It also can be used in place of other, neutral phrases that have fallen out of favor, like "six of one, half dozen of the other," he said. But the negative connotation might explain why "whatever" was judged more annoying than the ever-popular "you know," which was recently given a public workout by Caroline Kennedy during her flirtation with the New York U.S. Senate seat vacated by Hillary Rodham Clinton. "You know," Adams notes, is a way for speakers to seek assent from others. Pollsters at the Poughkeepsie, N.Y. college surveyed 938 U.S. adults by telephone Aug. 3-Aug 6. The margin of error is 3.2 percentage points. The five choices included were chosen by people at the poll discussing what popular words and phrases might be considered especially annoying, said spokeswoman Mary Azzoli. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azbearsfan Posted October 10, 2009 Report Share Posted October 10, 2009 "It's a word that — and it depends how a speaker uses it — can suggest dismissiveness." Yes, I dismiss the statement because of its ridiculous nature. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.