Aromashodo

[Connorbear]

Was on the field for several reps and Cutler did not throw to him once. Cutler has been asking for him to get more playing time. Did anyone notice if he was even getting open?

 

Peace

[bowlingtwig]

Was on the field for several reps and Cutler did not throw to him once. Cutler has been asking for him to get more playing time. Did anyone notice if he was even getting open?

 

Peace

To be honest I really didn't even see him out there except for maybe one play.

[barnesat]

To be honest I noticed him out there a number of times, but it seemed like every time I noticed he was on the field we called a running play. I am sure there were others where we did pass, but he was out there on a lot of running plays. I remember commenting about it while watching it. Maybe Turner gave him some playing time to appease Jay and then just called running plays while he was in there. :-)

 

 

Was on the field for several reps and Cutler did not throw to him once. Cutler has been asking for him to get more playing time. Did anyone notice if he was even getting open?

 

Peace

[nfoligno]

As already said, I also recall him out there on a few running plays, but overall don't recall seeing him that much. In fact, it was an in-game gripe of mine, not necessarily that he specifically was not playing, but how often we were using only two WRs.

 

Which reminds me. I keep reading that our OL played better in this game. Hogwash. We were in max protect a ton. Doing such does give Cutler a tad bit more time, maybe, but at the same time, it also takes away from his potential targets. I want to see us doing the opposite. Spread it out and give him more weapons to work with.

 

Back to Aromashadu, the other thing to consider is, he is likely not high in terms of reads. If DA is the 4th or 5th read when he does get in there for a passing play, and Cutler is pressured by the 2nd read, there are not going to be many opportunities for DA. Not unless plays are called with him more in mind, rather than as an afterthought.

 

Was on the field for several reps and Cutler did not throw to him once. Cutler has been asking for him to get more playing time. Did anyone notice if he was even getting open?

 

Peace

 

[bowlingtwig]

As already said, I also recall him out there on a few running plays, but overall don't recall seeing him that much. In fact, it was an in-game gripe of mine, not necessarily that he specifically was not playing, but how often we were using only two WRs.

 

Which reminds me. I keep reading that our OL played better in this game. Hogwash. We were in max protect a ton. Doing such does give Cutler a tad bit more time, maybe, but at the same time, it also takes away from his potential targets. I want to see us doing the opposite. Spread it out and give him more weapons to work with.

 

Back to Aromashadu, the other thing to consider is, he is likely not high in terms of reads. If DA is the 4th or 5th read when he does get in there for a passing play, and Cutler is pressured by the 2nd read, there are not going to be many opportunities for DA. Not unless plays are called with him more in mind, rather than as an afterthought.

A good coordinator would no what to do if the oline wasn't blocking well. I refer to Arizona where the Oline isn't very good so Arizona calls alot of 3 step drops and gets the ball out of Warner's hands ASAP.

[nfoligno]

I would argue that in Az, they have receivers such that it makes anything look easier.

 

One of our problems is our WRs need time to get separation. They simply don't create immediate sep like some other more seasoned WRs do. That hurts when you want to go w/ quick, 3 step drops. It sounds great, but if the WRs isn't open, you still can't complete a pass after 3 steps.

 

With that said, I do agree there are so many things you can do to compensate for poor OL.

 

One issue IMHO is, we have actually tried to go to the 3 step drop, but while we do this with the QB, we do not do this enough w/ the playcall for the WRs routes. There will be one WR who is running a quick strike route, but the rest of our weapons are running routes that require more time. That means if the one WR running the quick route is covered, the rest of the WRs still have their backs to the QB after he has taken the 3rd step.

 

I compare this to how our coaching on defense will blitz the QB, but give the WR 10 yards of cushion, which negates your blitzing efforts. If we tell Cutler to get rid of the ball after 3 steps, but don't give him enough weapons running quick routes, you negate the idea of the 3 step drop.

 

Obviously, there are the rollouts, and many other options available to compensate for weak OL play which we just are not seeing too. One thing I was surprised about. Phily is a very aggressive defense. After we ran the RB screen so well the prior week, I thought that would be a significant part of our scheme this week, but did we even run it. Once again, it seems our coaches out-think themselves. Something works well, so our staff begins to think the other team will adjust to him, and then goes away from what worked without first making the opponent prove they can stop it.

 

Is there any wonder why I believe our coaching staff is our greatest problem?

 

A good coordinator would no what to do if the oline wasn't blocking well. I refer to Arizona where the Oline isn't very good so Arizona calls alot of 3 step drops and gets the ball out of Warner's hands ASAP.

 

[bowlingtwig]

I would argue that in Az, they have receivers such that it makes anything look easier.

 

One of our problems is our WRs need time to get separation. They simply don't create immediate sep like some other more seasoned WRs do. That hurts when you want to go w/ quick, 3 step drops. It sounds great, but if the WRs isn't open, you still can't complete a pass after 3 steps.

 

With that said, I do agree there are so many things you can do to compensate for poor OL.

 

One issue IMHO is, we have actually tried to go to the 3 step drop, but while we do this with the QB, we do not do this enough w/ the playcall for the WRs routes. There will be one WR who is running a quick strike route, but the rest of our weapons are running routes that require more time. That means if the one WR running the quick route is covered, the rest of the WRs still have their backs to the QB after he has taken the 3rd step.

 

I compare this to how our coaching on defense will blitz the QB, but give the WR 10 yards of cushion, which negates your blitzing efforts. If we tell Cutler to get rid of the ball after 3 steps, but don't give him enough weapons running quick routes, you negate the idea of the 3 step drop.

 

Obviously, there are the rollouts, and many other options available to compensate for weak OL play which we just are not seeing too. One thing I was surprised about. Phily is a very aggressive defense. After we ran the RB screen so well the prior week, I thought that would be a significant part of our scheme this week, but did we even run it. Once again, it seems our coaches out-think themselves. Something works well, so our staff begins to think the other team will adjust to him, and then goes away from what worked without first making the opponent prove they can stop it.

 

Is there any wonder why I believe our coaching staff is our greatest problem?

I agree with you. Arizona does have much better WR's that makes things look easier but you just said it, about only having 1 run a quick route. Down in Arizona they have several players do a quick route while a 1 or maybe 2 go deep.

[bowlingtwig]

I agree with you. Arizona does have much better WR's that makes things look easier but you just said it, about only having 1 run a quick route. Down in Arizona they have several players do a quick route while a 1 or maybe 2 go deep.

I don't know how many times I have watched a game where I see Breaston and Boldin do quick routes and even send the RB(however is in at the time) out to the flat as more of a check down receiver as well. This helps Warner out tremendously and makes sure that he doesn't get beat up.

[nfoligno]

Down in Arizona they have several players do a quick route while a 1 or maybe 2 go deep.

 

And you do this by flooding the secondary w/ weapons.

 

That is what I really want to see. IMHO, the extra protection helps only a little, while the extra targets could help a lot.

 

We load up our protection, but as they are not very good blockers anyway, that protection still breaks down rather quickly. You might buy and extra second or two, but if you send out fewer weapons, they are still not able to get open, and thus Cutler is still running for his life.

 

What I would like to see is to simply spread it out. Go 4 wide. Bennett and Olsen can run short to intermediate routes, and after a quick chip, Forte is an option in the flat. Meanwhile, Knox and Hester are forcing DBs to respect the deeper stuff. Mix up the personnel, at times using a speed guy on a cross slant while Olsen attacks downfield, but you get the point. In doing this, Cutler has not just one, but as many as 3 quick release options. If the defense recognizes this and decides to play cover rather than attack, they Cutler has more time in the pocket and can push it downfield.

 

But no. We do the opposite. Rather than spread it out, we dumb it down. Rather than give Cutler more weapons and targets, we give him fewer. Oh yea, and we continue of force him to stay in the pocket, which we all know can last little more than 3 steps, if that.

[nfoligno]

Wow. Great minds think alike. I was in the process of posting nearly identical comments.

 

I don't know how many times I have watched a game where I see Breaston and Boldin do quick routes and even send the RB(however is in at the time) out to the flat as more of a check down receiver as well. This helps Warner out tremendously and makes sure that he doesn't get beat up.

 

[bowlingtwig]

Wow. Great minds think alike. I was in the process of posting nearly identical comments.

Quick tell Pix I have a great mind. lol

[nfoligno]

If I recall correct, you are in 2nd place in our FF league. Thus, the only thing I will be telling Pix about you is....well...er...um.....actually, I better keep that to myself as some younger kiddos could be reading this post, and I don't want to upset any parents

 

Quick tell Pix I have a great mind. lol

 

[bowlingtwig]

If I recall correct, you are in 2nd place in our FF league. Thus, the only thing I will be telling Pix about you is....well...er...um.....actually, I better keep that to myself as some younger kiddos could be reading this post, and I don't want to upset any parents

Don't forget im the hottest in the league with like 5 straight wins.

[nfoligno]

How's the saying go. Thats great kid. Don't get cocky.

 

I too reeled of 5 straight wins, only to drop my last two.

 

 

Big week this week against the #1 team.

 

 

Don't forget im the hottest in the league with like 5 straight wins.

 

[bowlingtwig]

How's the saying go. Thats great kid. Don't get cocky.

 

I too reeled of 5 straight wins, only to drop my last two.

 

 

Big week this week against the #1 team.

Yup, lets hope my players show and play like they have all year. I am more worried about playoff time then this coming week. I do have a nice cushion. I am kinda wondering what is going on with Keepers and Payouts. Do you know if anything has been made official.

[nfoligno]

Honestly, I do not know if anything has been made "official". Have you sent Pix an email?

 

Here is how I would vote.

 

Keeper. You can keep any ONE player you drafted, and who remained on your roster the entire year. If you want to keep that player, you must give up a draft pick one round earlier than you drafted him. That means you can not keep your first round picks. That is how I have done it in the past, and a way I thought worked pretty well.

 

As for payouts, how about.....

 

3rd place gets $25.

2nd place gets $50.

1st place gets $125.

 

 

 

What do you think.

 

Yup, lets hope my players show and play like they have all year. I am more worried about playoff time then this coming week. I do have a nice cushion. I am kinda wondering what is going on with Keepers and Payouts. Do you know if anything has been made official.

 

[flea]

with 2 wins & 10th place I don't care about the pay-out LOL

 

I like 2 keepers, the default is for 2 ya loose your 1st 2 picks

[bowlingtwig]

Honestly, I do not know if anything has been made "official". Have you sent Pix an email?

 

Here is how I would vote.

 

Keeper. You can keep any ONE player you drafted, and who remained on your roster the entire year. If you want to keep that player, you must give up a draft pick one round earlier than you drafted him. That means you can not keep your first round picks. That is how I have done it in the past, and a way I thought worked pretty well.

 

As for payouts, how about.....

 

3rd place gets $25.

2nd place gets $50.

1st place gets $125.

 

 

 

What do you think.

I like your idea for payout. I would like to see us keep 2 picks and I agree that you can't keep your 1st round draft choice. Makes things interesting.

[nfoligno]

The main reason I am not a big fan of multiple keepers is I love the draft, and when you have 2 keepers, you are taking potentially 20 players, good to great players, out of the mix. That just seems like a lot. Suddenly, you are drafting 2nd tier guys in the first round.

 

Also, by making it only one keeper, it makes it really interesting, as owners have some tough choices.

 

I like your idea for payout. I would like to see us keep 2 picks and I agree that you can't keep your 1st round draft choice. Makes things interesting.

 

[bowlingtwig]

The main reason I am not a big fan of multiple keepers is I love the draft, and when you have 2 keepers, you are taking potentially 20 players, good to great players, out of the mix. That just seems like a lot. Suddenly, you are drafting 2nd tier guys in the first round.

 

Also, by making it only one keeper, it makes it really interesting, as owners have some tough choices.

In the one keeper league that I was in we could keep between 0-2 keepers. If you kept 2 you would not a draft choice until the 3rd round. If you kept 1 you would start drafting in the 2nd round.

[nfoligno]

Just trying to understand. I will use a specific example.

 

This year, I drafted Rashard Mendenhall in the 13th round.

 

The way I have done it in the past, it would mean I get to keep Mendy for a 12th round pick.

 

Am I to understand that w/ your way, I could keep Mendy, but I would have to give up my 1st round pick?

 

To continue. I drafted Hakeem Nicks one round later. Now, I am not saying he is a player I would want to keep, but...

 

If I wanted to keep him, instead of someone else, I would normally expect to give up my 13th round pick, one round higher than I took him. If I go off what you said, I would have to give up a 1st? And if I wanted both he and Mendy, I would have to give up both my 1st and 2nd round picks to get Mendy and Nicks.

 

Just trying to best understand how you have done it in the past, as it is pretty different from what I have seen.

 

In the one keeper league that I was in we could keep between 0-2 keepers. If you kept 2 you would not a draft choice until the 3rd round. If you kept 1 you would start drafting in the 2nd round.

 

[bowlingtwig]

Just trying to understand. I will use a specific example.

 

This year, I drafted Rashard Mendenhall in the 13th round.

 

The way I have done it in the past, it would mean I get to keep Mendy for a 12th round pick.

 

Am I to understand that w/ your way, I could keep Mendy, but I would have to give up my 1st round pick?

 

To continue. I drafted Hakeem Nicks one round later. Now, I am not saying he is a player I would want to keep, but...

 

If I wanted to keep him, instead of someone else, I would normally expect to give up my 13th round pick, one round higher than I took him. If I go off what you said, I would have to give up a 1st? And if I wanted both he and Mendy, I would have to give up both my 1st and 2nd round picks to get Mendy and Nicks.

 

Just trying to best understand how you have done it in the past, as it is pretty different from what I have seen.

Yes that is correct. But now that I think about it I like your way best. Like I would probably want to keep Ced Benson, which I drafted him in the 11th rd this year and I would be willing to give up a 10th for him but probably not a 1st for him. The only player on my that I would give up a 1st for is Chris Johnson obviously.